Bring back former posters

[SENsei]

Nexus Nick

Am I misremembering..or is that the Essendon Trol that got banned under various namesl?

Nah - you're correct (which is why I made a comment about putting out some bait). We hardly need it back as Nexus anything given that it's still here masquerading as citywest,

There are a couple of others that have been mentioned that are also still here, just with different names.

Will I receive a warning for baiting??

[WellardSaint]

I used to work with Dan Warna, and still remain in contact with him (albeit very rarely) on Facebook. He seems to be fed up with the bickering, outrageous personal attacks, and mindless rubbish posted by some trolls.

[Cairnsman]

I used to work with Dan Warna, and still remain in contact with him (albeit very rarely) on Facebook. He seems to be fed up with the bickering, outrageous personal attacks, and mindless rubbish posted by some trolls.

If my memory serves me correctly DW has a robust and engaging posting style himself and still chimes in with a post every now and then. Probably still visits infrequently just to read, especially when there has been a significant event at the club like a coach sacking.

[ctqs]

Jars

SpIdErGiRl

[BakesFan]

BakesFan...... May be a bit windy up where he's at about now!....FNQ

Cheers, P14.. Fortunately Cyclone Dylan didn't cause too much of a hassle for us... I hope all is well in your neck of the woods.


On Topic...Sadly, I think it's way too late to entice many of the aforementioned posters back to SS..... I lost my passion for the place after the Milton66 debacle.

BfUSA neglected to mention mod appointments and Admin disinterest as reasons for many posters abandoning the place.

There was a time when enthusiastic and vigorous debate of issues was the norm... now it seems to be mostly pissing contests and playing the man.

I drop in to have a read occasionally...mostly to keep up with footy news.....I rarely post as it all seems a bit empty and pointless now.

[Cairnsman]

BakesFan...... May be a bit windy up where he's at about now!....FNQ

Cheers, P14.. Fortunately Cyclone Dylan didn't cause too much of a hassle for us... I hope all is well in your neck of the woods.


On Topic...Sadly, I think it's way too late to entice many of the aforementioned posters back to SS..... I lost my passion for the place after the Milton66 debacle.

BfUSA neglected to mention mod appointments and Admin disinterest as reasons for many posters abandoning the place.

There was a time when enthusiastic and vigorous debate of issues was the norm... now it seems to be mostly pissing contests and playing the man.

I drop in to have a read occasionally...mostly to keep up with footy news.....I rarely post as it all seems a bit empty and pointless now.

I agree with this, I think having an active Admin would help improve the place. Finding out who owns the website and inviting them onto the board to have an open discussion and to hear the concerns and suggestions of the posters could help also.

[BackFromUSA]

Cairnsman

You are now taking your agenda to overthrow the current admin into the public arena and so I am responding here.

I have pointed out numerous times that the admin and their contacts are available on this site. You can contact them.

The admin have nothing to do with the task of moderation.

They are effectively the owners / managers and they appoint moderators and they decide the forum settings and capabilities.

I have even sent you the post from 2008 when Damien the creator of Saintsational handed the keys to the current administrators and the history of how it was paid for - from funded by him and his family to a forum community funding model.

You are clearly ignoring this and agitating for a change of administrators because the Administrators hold all the power and control over this site. I have also pointed out that I am not an administrator and only became a moderator to tackle the problems that BakesFan alluded to ... The bickering, the abuse and the lack of quality footy discussion.

As a moderator I can do that.

You have clearly indicated to me that you see nothing wrong with Saintsational and the "pissing contest" is part of the entertainment and attraction of Saintsational to it's posters and I could not disagree more.

You have clearly indicated to me that you believe that the current administrators should be replaced by a constitution, a shareholders scheme and a management team which would involve those involved to reveal their identity AND you have suggested faceless moderation so that moderators do not receive abusive PMs and continue to post here with their normal user names.

I have clearly outlined my concerns regarding the above with my belief that the organic development of the site management has been in the most part fine for 15 years, that I believe it is important to a forum like this that we are for the most part anonymous (although I am happy to meet anyone face to face) and that I am concerned that a restructuring may place the people who would like Saintsational to be more "adult" and allow more bickering and have less rules and moderation to win power and convert this place. I have pointed out that this place was started by a kid of 12 and should remain kid friendly. Finally I believe that moderators should not have to hide - that is dangerous in itself - but the responsibility for not abusing moderators lies with the posters to (a) not breach rules and (b) not abuse the moderator for pointing it out or for issuing a warning. And how would you feel if a faceless moderator just warned and banned you and others without any discussion?

All I want the current administrators to do is:

(A) allow access to people to read the forum without registering
(B) only allow registered users to post
(C) make the site tapatalk compliant for use on mobile devices

These requests have been in for a month or two and I hope will be agreed upon and done ASAP.

I believe with vigilant moderation and these new features posters will return and new posters will be attracted

As stated I believe that Saintsational.com should return as a news hub website but due to your ongoing passionate objection to this I have shelved it for now although the brief is in with my web guy and I hope to launch pre-season in some form whether it be on Saintsational.com with this communities support - or as an independent site with the aim of uniting all of the traditional and social media outlets into a hub and in doing so make fans aware of this forum and other social media outlets.

Simon

<poster warned for brining issues discussed in PM into the public forum>

[plugger66]

Well if one person has that much power to change what you actually want then we have some real issues. Why are you doing what Cairnsman wants regarding being a news hub website? Now that is really weird. I am passionate that we have that. Does that mean we now go back and do it?

Can i ask one serious question. Why the hell would the admin take so long to grant your requests? And if as it seems they arent interested then how do you get new admin?

[BackFromUSA]

Plugger66

These are good questions.

- Battye is the one that Damien left in charge of admin with hsvking but it is Battye with the forum software knowledge

- I shall re-email Battye and ask if be can complete these tasks in February

- if he cannot then I shall pay a consultant to do so ... Open reading and tapatalk are needed IMHO

- I have wasted 1 to 2 weeks debating my right to do the website with Cairnsman and to a degree he is right as I am not an owner and administrator not do I control the domain name - so what I have resolved is to build the website to create the hub for all traditional and social media with some proprietary content and load it into a new URL and if at some stage Saintsational members agree then I can then load it onto Saintsational.com and the forum would remain separate on the .net.

The website will remain ad and commercial free like this forum and will rely on voluntary editorial and financial contributions of its participants.

To answer your question - I guess the current admin would have to grant the right for someone to be added to or replace existing admin ... They can decide this or alternatively I could contact Damien - the 12 year old that created this site around 15 years ago and seek his support for a change but I would rather keep the current admin - especially Battye due to his knowledge of the forum software.

I hope I have answered all questions.

I sincerely hope by end of February to have the forum open to readers and tapatalk compliant.

I shall aim to launch the hub website before the season starts ... URL tbc.

[Cairnsman]

Well if one person has that much power to change what you actually want then we have some real issues. Why are you doing what Cairnsman wants regarding being a news hub website? Now that is really weird. I am passionate that we have that. Does that mean we now go back and do it?

Can i ask one serious question. Why the hell would the admin take so long to grant your requests? And if as it seems they arent interested then how do you get new admin?

P66 let me fill you in on a few details of my discussions with BackfromUSA.

I am generally in agreeance with most of the changes that BackfromUSA is proposing, however I have the following concerns,

1. Maintaining our independence, how do we do it: from the club and AFL. I would be concerned that if we start to jump into bed with the club/AFL then the club/AFL may exert pressure on us when they don't like something about the website. I have asked BackfromUSA if it would be possible to look into what could be done to protect the independence. I firmly believe the thing that sets SS apart from the bland sanitised social media websites that are controlled by the club/AFL such as facebook and Twitter is it's right to discuss anything about the club without fear of club/AFL sensorship.

2. Ownership: it concerns me that Saintsaional could be commercialised and taken over by stealth with this new website all the mean while using the SS brand and posters to create value for a website that is not owned and operated by SS. I believe the value of SS is in the core group of posters that visit and contribute to this site and as such I believe the ownership should stay with them if possible and that is why I think it is important that we find out who the real owner of SS is and start to discuss the future of the website to hopefully preserve and protect it. BackfromUSA has argued that what he is trying to do is rid the site of it's toxic posters as he believes that "toxic" posters are the perceived problem. Although I don't necessarily agree, I agree that the site could do with proper moderation and that that end I think BackfromUSA has made some inroads but important to distinguish is the fact that moderation is a completely separate issue from ownership and administration. Basically it would be good to know that any Joe Blow can come along and start up a website called Saintsational and steal it's brand and posters. Not say that BackfromUSA is doing that but if there isn't any protection in place to stop that what is to stop it happening say in the event that BackfromUSA decides he's had enough and walks away from it all...wouldn't it then be open for someone else to just come in take it over without challenge. The other thing that BackfromUSA and I agree on is that we both agree that the site is owned by the posters. Not sure what that means but the posters certainly have some claim to the place I would have thought and if they do it might be worth having that formalised.

3. More research: about the perceived problem. BackfromUSA started this thread because I asked him if he had actually carried out any real in depth research as to the SS market, it's poster profile, site statistics. He has been very evasive on this point and all I say is we should have a deeper look at what we really want to achieve. BackfromUSA argues that more posters could be the answer, he could be right but I think there are other things we could do to improve SS. If we change the site to be more kid friendly will that necessarily motivate the mostly older male posters to engage with kids more. I wonder if the thing that separates this site from other social media outlets is the fact that it seems to be a cyber recreation of the bars you visit before the footy or the sections of the ground at the footy where mostly adults hang. Just reckon we should have a closer look at the profile of the SS poster to determine where the market.

I could go on and I will at a latter stage but got to run because Sunday beckons however I'd just like to make the point about Tapatalk. IMO this could possibly be the single most significant improvement in terms of getting more posters to post. Reason being is because the phbBB software really has been caught with it's pants down with regards to the smartphone revolution. IMO if you could navigate and input to the site with a smartphone friendly interface then this would probably increase usage significantly especially threads like the match day threads and the like or even when you are away from the desktop, I know personally from using my Samsung S3 that it is very frustrating to use the SS website to the point where you don't even try.

[SENsei]

Engaging conversation and all positive discussion about the site. Keep the dialogue going and use the expertise of those posters in those areas that we need it. It can only be to the long term benefit of SS. It's all about social interaction about the StKFC. Anything that encourages that can only be a positive.

[asiu]

i'd like to see a list of 'these toxic posters'

[GrumpyOne]

Plugger66

These are good questions.

- Battye is the one that Damien left in charge of admin with hsvking but it is Battye with the forum software knowledge

- I shall re-email Battye and ask if be can complete these tasks in February

- if he cannot then I shall pay a consultant to do so ... Open reading and tapatalk are needed IMHO

- I have wasted 1 to 2 weeks debating my right to do the website with Cairnsman and to a degree he is right as I am not an owner and administrator not do I control the domain name - so what I have resolved is to build the website to create the hub for all traditional and social media with some proprietary content and load it into a new URL and if at some stage Saintsational members agree then I can then load it onto Saintsational.com and the forum would remain separate on the .net.

The website will remain ad and commercial free like this forum and will rely on voluntary editorial and financial contributions of its participants.

To answer your question - I guess the current admin would have to grant the right for someone to be added to or replace existing admin ... They can decide this or alternatively I could contact Damien - the 12 year old that created this site around 15 years ago and seek his support for a change but I would rather keep the current admin - especially Battye due to his knowledge of the forum software.

I hope I have answered all questions.

I sincerely hope by end of February to have the forum open to readers and tapatalk compliant.

I shall aim to launch the hub website before the season starts ... URL tbc.

More evidence for community ownership of this forum.

[BackFromUSA]

Cairnsman

Re this paragraph:

"3. More research: about the perceived problem. BackfromUSA started this thread because I asked him if he had actually carried out any real in depth research as to the SS market, it's poster profile, site statistics. He has been very evasive on this point and all I say is we should have a deeper look at what we really want to achieve. BackfromUSA argues that more posters could be the answer, he could be right but I think there are other things we could do to improve SS. If we change the site to be more kid friendly will that necessarily motivate the mostly older male posters to engage with kids more. I wonder if the thing that separates this site from other social media outlets is the fact that it seems to be a cyber recreation of the bars you visit before the footy or the sections of the ground at the footy where mostly adults hang. Just reckon we should have a closer look at the profile of the SS poster to determine where the market."

To say that I have been evasive is a complete mistruth.

a) I have pointed out to you that I have consulted with the forum IN DEPTH prior to any change
b) I have pointed out to you that I have consulted with the forum as to what features they want on the forum AND in terms of integration with other social media etc
c) I have pointed out that I am not an administrator and as a moderator I have access only to the same information on the site's membership as you do
d) I have pointed out to you that you can look at the "members" tab and manipulate the information to gain some insights BUT pointed out you needed to do it if you want it

IMHO that is being fully responsive and far from evasive. You have the information I have. You have the access I have. If you want the information, you are welcome to it.

I am not "employed" by you to do your work to serve your purpose.

I am also not asking "older" people to engage more with "kids" ... ALL posters on Saintsational Fan Forum are treated equally no matter their age.

However the Saintsational Fan Forum shall always be kid friendly (after all it was created by a kid) and thus does not need to be changed ... all that needed to happen was for the forum rules to be enforced to achieve that. We should be encouraging the younger generation to be a part of the Saints fan family ... and to this end the rules are in place in regards to suitable content for Saintsational and I am prepared to moderate to the rules without fear or favour.

Your view is that this is some form of adult playground like a bar or alcohol bays at the footy - is just that - your view. It was not what Saintsational was created to be. You are welcome to do that in the Animal Enclosure forum. it is set up just for that. Saintsational was created to be for fans of all ages. Has always been and should always be.

[BackFromUSA]

i'd like to see a list of 'these toxic posters'

There is NO LIST of "toxic posters".

But toxic posting would be defined as those that breach the rules that then lead posters from continuing posting or people reading the site regularly OR prevents them from registering ...

Each post is judged on its merit.

If it breaches a rule then either a PM is sent to educate the poster, if education fails, then warnings are issued and if enough warnings are received in the prescribed time period then a ban will be issued - no matter who the poster is.

[Cairnsman]

i'd like to see a list of 'these toxic posters'

Gaz I hope that we don't get distracted by that issue, I think what would be more beneficial would be for us to have a look at what statistics/data the phpBB software can provide and interrogate it so we can see if there is any useful information we can glean to base our decisions on because at present I feel we might be basing some decisions on incorrect or insufficient information. I think it might be helpful if we can find out things such as:

How many registered posters are there in total?
How many registered posters are active and define what is active in terms of frequency of visits and posts? i.e. daily, weekly, Monthly.
Of the posters that are believed to have left the site when was their last visit or post?
A list of posters and their number of logins to least number of logins? (Login but not post though)
A post count by user and ordered from highest number of posts to least number of posts?

I think the issue of how many registered posters is good for SS needs to be researched and discussed in more detail to better understand the situation. I'm not saying it needs to be capped or anything like that but I wonder if that is the whole problem which is what BackfromUSA is arguing. I have argued that another way of attracting more members or encouraging those that mostly read than post is to attract posters to the site with a club profile (past or present). An example of this is when Grant Thomas popped in early last year, members out of the woodwork. So maybe we should be looking to see if it s possible to invite people with a club history, whether it be from Admin, Coaching, recruiting, players, medical etc. I think a trying to create discussion with these types of posters will possibly not only encourage more to register but it could also encourage and revivalist existing members. BackfromUSA argued that our "toxic" members would not allow this idea to be successful and I countered by saying that we would need to get certain aspects of the site improved first, namely ownership, administration and moderation.

As a side note to the above, I recently was listening to some guys that do a segment on SEN about IT in sport. I believe they are IT consultants for sporting clubs and the big stadiums around Australia and they have done and are doing work with the AFL and various clubs. Anyway one of the things they recommended when it come to preparing an IT and/or social media website strategy was to only pick one or two sites and focus your management and finances on those only because if you try to adopt too many social media tools and websites for your market audience then you could spread yourself too thin and spread your market audience thinner. This really struck a chord with me because I think this advice is on the money and that is another concern I have about pouring what little management and finance resources we have into what really looks like a speculation website, when I wonder if it would be better to direct our available resources into the SS website.

Questions I have relating to SS membership are:

-Could it be that our membership base is linked to the clubs membership base? Is there a ceiling on what can be realistically achieve in terms of registered members and should we be looking just to improve what we have to work with.
-Could we learn something by using Google Analytics to better understand traffic to and from the site and other data. BackfromUSA by his own addmission is not IT savy nor does he have admin rights so maybe if we can fix these issues we can get some real stats collected.

[BackFromUSA]

GrumpyOne

The site is "community owned" ... the key issue is that we need someone to undertake the IT stuff associated with the fan forum in a more timely manner.

The issues I have with "community ownership" under the constitution / share ownership / elected officials model that has been flagged by Cairnsman to me is that

(a) I am not the right person to be flagging them with - these are issues for Admin to deal with (and I have told him that repeatedly)

(b) that under his proposed structure that a takeover is MORE LIKELY and the very nature of the forum could change overnight

(c) a forum that reflects poorly on the image of St Kilda and / or the AFL and their copyrighted properties OR becomes a commercial enterprise competing against the revenue streams of St Kilda or AFL, OR even worse breaches cyber-bullying legislation will be shut down by the AFL through legal action - as they have done twice in the past.

The site has organically developed over 15 years but has kept is core principles and whilst I acknowledge that we need quicker IT updates there is no need to alter the administration (caretakers) of Damien's Saintsational.

[BackFromUSA]

i'd like to see a list of 'these toxic posters'

Gaz I hope that we don't get distracted by that issue, I think what would be more beneficial would be for us to have a look at what statistics/data the phpBB software can provide and interrogate it so we can see if there is any useful information we can glean to base our decisions on because at present I feel we might be basing some decisions on incorrect or insufficient information. I think it might be helpful if we can find out things such as:

How many registered posters are there in total?

==> this information is available on the board index.

Total posts 985252 • Total topics 46590 • Total members 4822
Our newest member TRENTDENNISLANE


How many registered posters are active and define what is active in terms of frequency of visits and posts? i.e. daily, weekly, Monthly.

==> this information is available in the members tab ... just click on the LAST ACTIVE tab and it puts it in date or reverse date order. If you want this information ... copy and paste it into excel and tabulate for days / weeks / months ... this is open information and you are welcome to it ... let us know what you find

Of the posters that are believed to have left the site when was their last visit or post?

==> well I am trying to determine who of the mainstays of the site has left and then we can look at their posting history but what would this prove? How does it answer WHY they have left or read or post less?

A list of posters and their number of logins to least number of logins? (Login but not post though)

==> this might be available in the admin panel - I am not sure

A post count by user and ordered from highest number of posts to least number of posts?

==> this information is available in the members tab ... just click on the POSTS tab and it puts it in order from highest to lowest or lowest to highest

I think the issue of how many registered posters is good for SS needs to be researched and discussed in more detail to better understand the situation. I'm not saying it needs to be capped or anything like that but I wonder if that is the whole problem which is what BackfromUSA is arguing.

==> there should be no limits ... however we do need new members ... last member joined 6 months ago!!!

I have argued that another way of attracting more members or encouraging those that mostly read than post is to attract posters to the site with a club profile (past or present). An example of this is when Grant Thomas popped in early last year, members out of the woodwork. So maybe we should be looking to see if it s possible to invite people with a club history, whether it be from Admin, Coaching, recruiting, players, medical etc. I think a trying to create discussion with these types of posters will possibly not only encourage more to register but it could also encourage and revivalist existing members. BackfromUSA argued that our "toxic" members would not allow this idea to be successful and I countered by saying that we would need to get certain aspects of the site improved first, namely ownership, administration and moderation.

==> actually I stated that Grant withdrew from contributing because of the behaviour of some posters and his desire not to cause or be part of such conflict

==> I stated my belief that no official or ex official would put themselves in a position on the forum to be open to abuse and that high level of moderation is required if they do

==> I have also stated that such people may be more willing to make editorial or opinion contributions to a website (rather than forum) where they are more protected

As a side note to the above, I recently was listening to some guys that do a segment on SEN about IT in sport. I believe they are IT consultants for sporting clubs and the big stadiums around Australia and they have done and are doing work with the AFL and various clubs. Anyway one of the things they recommended when it come to preparing an IT and/or social media website strategy was to only pick one or two sites and focus your management and finances on those only because if you try to adopt too many social media tools and websites for your market audience then you could spread yourself too thin and spread your market audience thinner. This really struck a chord with me because I think this advice is on the money and that is another concern I have about pouring what little management and finance resources we have into what really looks like a speculation website, when I wonder if it would be better to direct our available resources into the SS website.

==> the saints fan market is already spread! It is on the Saints official website, twitter, facebook, instagram, if is on SaintsFooty and other fan facebook sites, it is linked into the twitter feeds of players and media commenators about th saints, it is reading the Age, herald Sun, the Australian, AFL website and in terms of forums there is always Big Footy etc ... it is spread. What I have proposed is to unify them and introduce each element to each other and helping each to grow with exposure to a wider audience.

==> our available resources (funds held in trust from donations on Saintsational Fan Forum) are only being used for the Fan Forum and nothing in that regard is changing

==> the "speculation website" you refer to is being donated by me so zero financial or other resources are being used other than my own at this stage and I have stated clearly for the past week that I would build it outside of the framework to deal with your dissatisfaction and then everyone can judge it on it's merit from there. It won't be a Saintsational site.

Questions I have relating to SS membership are:

-Could it be that our membership base is linked to the clubs membership base? Is there a ceiling on what can be realistically achieve in terms of registered members and should we be looking just to improve what we have to work with.

==> No. the club has many more fans than members. Look at their official facebook site as an example. More likes and followers than actual Saints members.

-Could we learn something by using Google Analytics to better understand traffic to and from the site and other data. BackfromUSA by his own addmission is not IT savy nor does he have admin rights so maybe if we can fix these issues we can get some real stats collected.

==> I do not understand how these stats will help the tech features and behavioural needs of the site ... so we shall know how many site participants live in what State or country (currently not previously) or what their age brackets are (currently not previously) or what demographic is the most frequent user (currently not previously) ... and what does that do for us?

What we need IMHO is:

==> battye to change the forum setting to allow unregistered readers and ensure only registered posters

==> battye or someone else to make us tapatalk compliant (although I personally have no problem at all using saintsational on my iPhone in safari)

==> a communication to lapsed members explaining the rules from July 2013 and the new moderation policy and invite them back

==> a mechanism that exposes Saints fans (of all ages and from all locations and all walks of life) to come and visit Saintsational and join in and the Saints Hub concept is one way

MY FOCUS is on making these things happen and I have consulted with the Saintsational posters with open communication since July on these matters and have support to proceed.

If you want to pursue the ownership control issue then as advised constantly and repeatedly - contact the ADMIN of this site and work it out with them.

I have answered all of your questions via PM and here in public once you brought your dissatisfaction with current ADMIN into this post.

[asiu]

luv your passion cairnsman
... and i agree re an understanding of the traffic to , the involvement & behaviour of that traffic and decisions made with regards to those understandings.

i have long argued , on observation alone , that the older posters were stupidly 'n
ignorantly discriminated against

whilst i have expressed defiance towards 'simons way/s' i also appreciate his passion
for his beliefs.

everyone would be well aware of my contempt for untruths , propaganda 'n manipulation to advance an agenda ,
(not that i am against the focussed agenda but the hypocracy of the machination/s)

and in 'simons way' i see much of that behaviour.

(thats NOT a slight against simon or his agenda ... but the methodologies he embraces
to fullfill his agenda)

personally i think his moderation agenda is built on a quicksand of false understandings,
judgments 'n a personal wish for 1950's style discourse forced on the participants with his big stick ... basically american mannered communication coz u dont know if the person your talking AT has a gun.

i seem to be in the 'outer' with this opinion ... but i aint selling out my god given right
to hold 'my' opinion 'n i'll resist every attempt where possible to control my right
to express it in a style that I SEE FIT.

the mob always Rule 'n they love the propaganda of righteousness ... doesnt make em emotionally or intellectually healthy but !

[Sock Puppet]

1. New Mod.




2.

.....................................a list of 'these toxic posters'

3. Resolve the problem.




4. Party time.

[BackFromUSA]

luv your passion cairnsman
... and i agree re an understanding of the traffic to , the involvement & behaviour of that traffic and decisions made with regards to those understandings.

i have long argued , on observation alone , that the older posters were stupidly 'n
ignorantly discriminated against

whilst i have expressed defiance towards 'simons way/s' i also appreciate his passion
for his beliefs.

everyone would be well aware of my contempt for untruths , propaganda 'n manipulation to advance an agenda ,
(not that i am against the focussed agenda but the hypocracy of the machination/s)

and in 'simons way' i see much of that behaviour.

(thats NOT a slight against simon or his agenda ... but the methodologies he embraces
to fullfill his agenda)

personally i think his moderation agenda is built on a quicksand of false understandings,
judgments 'n a personal wish for 1950's style discourse forced on the participants with his big stick ... basically american mannered communication coz u dont know if the person your talking AT has a gun.

i seem to be in the 'outer' with this opinion ... but i aint selling out my god given right
to hold 'my' opinion 'n i'll resist every attempt where possible to control my right
to express it in a style that I SEE FIT.

the mob always Rule 'n they love the propaganda of righteousness ... doesnt make em emotionally or intellectually healthy but !

And I love that there are people like you and cairnsman that question what I do ... it is good to have checks and balances.

What people MUST remember is that we, the good citizens of Saintsational, only exist because of the good grace of the AFL allowing us to use their property and if we don't have rules and moderation and remain commercial free, then anything that offends the community, breaches the laws of the land (e.g. cyber-bullying) or diminishes the commercial return to St Kilda and / or the AFL will result in the AFL shutting down this site as they have done to 2 fan forums in the past using the technical breach of copyright big stick.

As for my moderation style it is simple.

There are rules
===> breach the rules first time, I educate
===> breach the rules again, I re-educate
===> another breach and no more pure education = a warning
===> further breaches more warnings
===> bans as dictated under the rules e.g. for 3 warnings within time period

Is this big stick? If it is I apologise. I feel it is necessary.

As for those who want to have a more liberal forum ... the Animal Enclosure is there for you. It is adults only and only has rules to protect against cyber-bullying which is against State and federal laws with penalties included of fines and jail terms and even penalties for those that facilitate through inaction.

As such I take the role very seriously.

[plugger66]

luv your passion cairnsman
... and i agree re an understanding of the traffic to , the involvement & behaviour of that traffic and decisions made with regards to those understandings.

i have long argued , on observation alone , that the older posters were stupidly 'n
ignorantly discriminated against

whilst i have expressed defiance towards 'simons way/s' i also appreciate his passion
for his beliefs.

everyone would be well aware of my contempt for untruths , propaganda 'n manipulation to advance an agenda ,
(not that i am against the focussed agenda but the hypocracy of the machination/s)

and in 'simons way' i see much of that behaviour.

(thats NOT a slight against simon or his agenda ... but the methodologies he embraces
to fullfill his agenda)

personally i think his moderation agenda is built on a quicksand of false understandings,
judgments 'n a personal wish for 1950's style discourse forced on the participants with his big stick ... basically american mannered communication coz u dont know if the person your talking AT has a gun.

i seem to be in the 'outer' with this opinion ... but i aint selling out my god given right
to hold 'my' opinion 'n i'll resist every attempt where possible to control my right
to express it in a style that I SEE FIT.

the mob always Rule 'n they love the propaganda of righteousness ... doesnt make em emotionally or intellectually healthy but !

And I love that there are people like you and cairnsman that question what I do ... it is good to have checks and balances.

What people MUST remember is that we, the good citizens of Saintsational, only exist because of the good grace of the AFL allowing us to use their property and if we don't have rules and moderation and remain commercial free, then anything that offends the community, breaches the laws of the land (e.g. cyber-bullying) or diminishes the commercial return to St Kilda and / or the AFL will result in the AFL shutting down this site as they have done to 2 fan forums in the past using the technical breach of copyright big stick.

As for my moderation style it is simple.

There are rules
===> breach the rules first time, I educate
===> breach the rules again, I re-educate
===> another breach and no more pure education = a warning
===> further breaches more warnings
===> bans as dictated under the rules e.g. for 3 warnings within time period

Is this big stick? If it is I apologise. I feel it is necessary.

As for those who want to have a more liberal forum ... the Animal Enclosure is there for you. It is adults only and only has rules to protect against cyber-bullying which is against State and federal laws with penalties included of fines and jail terms and even penalties for those that facilitate through inaction.

As such I take the role very seriously.

As I have expressed many times if what you say about warnings and breaches was true it would be good but it seems do to lack of mods that dobbing is the main reason for warnings and breaches. Again that would be ok if everyone who broke the rules was diobbed on but it doesnt happen. the only way it ill ever be fair is getting more mods and for some reason you or whoever picks the mods seem to reject the ones that say they will do it. Yes those people may not be the perfect mod but the way it is run using dobbing as the main reason now is very much less than ideal. By the way I think you are way to serious thanking the AFL for letting us use their product. We talk about the product but we dont use anything. If people post stuff that has been printed that is completely different to us having opinions on players or the state of thegame. They cant stop that I would think. And the AE isnt adults only at all. You not reregister and prove your age to go on there. Doubt that saves any type of action that could be taken on any other part of the forum.

By the way why dont we get new mods and who picks them if someone wants to do it?

[GrumpyOne]

GrumpyOne

The site is "community owned" ....

No it's not.

After all these years, I feel that I am part of the community of Saintsational, no matter how much that fact sticks in certain people's craws.

I have never been asked to take part in any sort of vote regarding ownership, administration or moderation of the site.

Each time a change has happened, pre yourself being involved, it came as a pronouncement from God.

It has been different since your involvement, but only that the intention to change was announced, with the change being a fait accompli a few days later.

It is a private site where ownership has been assumed by Battye on the principle of Terra Nullius.

Many of the old-timers here contributed to keep the site operational. They have told me that they have bugger-all say as well.

That is a dead parrot you are trying to sell us.

[BakesFan]

'beautiful plumage'...... but still dead.

[Cairnsman]

Great contributions starting to come in now, there are three things that stood out from reading different contributions above:

Contribution number one from Principle of Q'uo: and in 'simons way' i see much of that behaviour.

(thats NOT a slight against simon or his agenda ... but the methodologies he embraces
to fullfill his agenda)


Contribution number two from P66: By the way I think you are way to serious thanking the AFL for letting us use their product. We talk about the product but we dont use anything. If people post stuff that has been printed that is completely different to us having opinions on players or the state of thegame. They cant stop that I would think. And the AE isnt adults only at all. You not reregister and prove your age to go on there. Doubt that saves any type of action that could be taken on any other part of the forum.

Contribution number three from Grumpy One: It is a private site where ownership has been assumed by Battye on the principle of Terra Nullius.

Many of the old-timers here contributed to keep the site operational. They have told me that they have bugger-all say as well.


That is a dead parrot you are trying to sell us.

Simon you are to be commended for the volunteer work you do and I for one will put my hand up to help if I can in any way including donating money but I just think that the first thing we need to do is give this site to the people. They have made it and they own it IMO. The discussions and opinion on this board are not the property of the club/AFL and without the fanatic dedication of many people that visit and contribute to this site, toxic or not is irrelevant because in actual fact this site creates value for the club/AFL and steps should be taken to protect it's ownership and it's independence. I know with your background that you know that but for some reason you are against that. And another thing that puzzles me is that when you have seemingly been painted into a corner with our recent correspondence you default with your favourred get of jail card "I am just mod, you need to talk to admin".