Jump to content

You're currently viewing the forum as a Guest
register-now-button_orig.png
and join in with discussions   
ask migration questions
message other members

..and much much more!

ali

CTF - what's the solution

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Gbye grey sky said:

Personally I am with you, Newjez and Tonyman on this subject.

I have never reported a single post to the mods.  I think many are far too over-sensitive.

For instance I fully understand that you are a bit of a sh*t-stirrer but there is a strong undercurrent of humour in it.

Threads do go ‘off the rails’ invariably but, like the Brexit thread, often find their equilibrium again once some new information comes to light.

I can well imagine though that actually having to read, delete and respond to these threads must be tiresome and it doesn’t actually add anything to the core value of the site itself so fully understand the rationale to ‘kill’ it.

I  haven’t reported a post.  Why do people do it?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, MacGyver said:

A politics sub-forum? It's an unusually dynamic time in politics and people have strong views on both sides. Perhaps keeping CTF for other topical issues, but directing political discourse to a sub-forum would ring fence some of the more robust discussions.

I see a lot of comments about it being banter, but it's not always the case. Yesterday there were insults directed at someone's family which for me crosses a line, no matter the reason. 

I would adopt a zero tolerance approach to personal attacks, insults, racism, religious bigotry etc. I'm not suggesting this is a regular thing on the forum, or that any posters do this. But given we are all opposed to these things, it should be easy to support strong action against it, should it occur.

This would still place the burden on the moderators, but perhaps make it easier to direct Respectful political discourse to the politics sub-forum. If any new posters signed up and evidenced racist insults, personal attacks or insults etc then a single strike policy flowed by a long ban should do the trick. If it's really about banter and debate then this shouldn't be problematic for anyone, not diminish the lively nature of CTF

 

Now that's a very good idea.  I have zero interest in politics so it would be one thread I wouldn't be interested in but all the other folk who enjoy political banter could banter away to their heart's content.  Left v right  .................  white supremacists v 'lettuce leaves'   ...................  just let them get on with it.  It would have to be respectful of course  .............  is that possible   though?  🤔

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Collie said:

You are kidding, right?

Simmo is 90% of the problem (with a handful of others).

Constantly starting trolling and subliminally racist threads.

You have to ask the ?  What is the purpose of the site?  I thought it was for migrants/potential migtants to Australia

Close CTF IMO.  It adds 0 value to an otherwise ok site.  The CTF threads actually show the site in a very bad light and diminishes any credibility the other threads have.

It is dominanted by Dad's army posters who are largely based in the UK and have nothing to do with Australia.  They add no value to the main threads at all and are just interested in shit stirring.

I'd love to know how many migrants (with good practical knowledge about Australia) have walked away from this site, I know of a few in Perth.

I agree with a lot of what you say but if there was a thread just for political "banter" they could all just use that.  Maybe it could be closed off and only used by those keen on discussing politics and the rest of us wouldn't have to see all the sh!t that they were spouting.  On the whole, CTF is good fun and it would be a shame if the whole thing had to be closed.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, simmo said:

The sad thing is that it is obvious where this will end up.  I find it very sad that it has come to this.  Not just PIO but in general.  People think they have a god given right not to be offended or have their views challenged.   I despair at the way the world turned out like this - they have won 😞  This forum will be closed and the perpetually offended can go back to their world of bland and make themselves a nice cup of camomile tea in celebration.  Woop woop!! 

 

................  but it does get personal and nasty at times here Simmo.  There is no need for that at all.  Perhaps I notice it more because apart from PIO I am not involved in any other social media stuff.  Maybe I need to toughen up but I really dislike the utterly unpleasant and arrogant posts some people make.  I have one person in particular in mind  .......  and it isn't you. 😄  By the way I have never reported a poster. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are you seeking to achieve with CTF, as a section within PomsInOz and the wider family of Migration Australia sites?

Is it adding value and credibility to your Migration Australia brand? Enhancing its reputation or taking away from it, turning iinto a serious liability? That should give you the answer.

Either way if you decide to keep it as part of Migration Australia or move it to its own site, it dilutes your credibility and increases your liability. More or different infringements don’t chance that. . So either:

1) Police it more, and consistently, based on rules with a legal basis to protect the entire site and Its ‘intended brand.

2) Equally important ensure that these rules are clear and understood by all - posters and admins/mods/others alike - so they are enforced for all posters (otherwise the threat to credibility and reduction of liability is not mitigated at all.

3) that’s not possible, shut it down, you all probably have better things to do with your time, and as a section it does nothing for your wider brand/sites. Unless what’s occurring right now is your intended brand, or aim. You’d still need to police it and have clear rules based in law and enforce them as such, to mitigate wider online liabilities and risks.


  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I used to use Australian property forum. (Now that place has some trolls. Makes CTF look like play school)
They had the actual forum, and then they had a lounge forum, which was similar to CTF.
If CTF was moved into a sub forum, which you had to switch to, then it could be kept separate from the migration stuff.
Any threads started in the migration thread which went bad could be moved to CTF.
Most people on here just search on activity. So, you wouldn't see ctf threads unless you were on CTF.
Allow people to report any hate crime stuff on CTF, but let people banter with each other.



The key is in clear rules and enforcement however. Else not acting on reported hate crimes or other potential issues becomes a liability for those managing/running and/or owning it.

The alternative is to acknowledge the current issues as part of the brand and accept the ensuing real risks.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, simmo said:

i fell asleep after line 2.  sorry.

I know that feeling....😂😂😂

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  1. Leave CTF as a place for general banter
  2. Create a "Current Affairs"  forum (I say current affairs because that covers things like climate change and celebrities as well as politics)
  3. Quarantine the Current Affairs forum, so people can do what they please and it doesn't adversely reflect on the main site.

When I say "quarantine", it might just be that the Current Affairs posts are marked "no follow" and are excluded from the "New Posts" results so we can all ignore it.   

Or it might be that the Current Affairs forum is private, like MBTTUK used to be - I think that would work well, because all the people who would use it are regulars so you can make an announcement and they can all join.

The big advantage of making it private is that the moderators can just ignore it.   

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Scot by birth, emigrated 1985 | Aussie husband applied UK spouse visa Jan 2015, granted March 2015, moved to UK May 2015 | Returned to Oz June 2016

"The stranger who comes home does not make himself at home but makes home itself strange." -- Rainer Maria Rilke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Toots said:

Now that's a very good idea.  I have zero interest in politics so it would be one thread I wouldn't be interested in but all the other folk who enjoy political banter could banter away to their heart's content.  Left v right  .................  white supremacists v 'lettuce leaves'   ...................  just let them get on with it.  It would have to be respectful of course  .............  is that possible   though?  🤔

😂.....you sound just like my wife.....she doesn’t think we should be told what politicians are going to do because she finds it so boring.....she says they should just get on and do it and if it all goes wrong.....that’s when we get involved and Sack them off for someone else......😂 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tbh, has anyone ever changed their minds on anything posted on CTF?

Whenever an argument is won, it's just met with smiley faces.

I lean a little to the left, but I have an open mind. But whenever I express that I'm met with personal attacks about fence sitting and flip flopping.

In light of the discussion, I'm struggling to see the point of CTF and wouldn't miss it. It must only be used by about a dozen people anyway, who are all entrenched in their beliefs.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A politics sub-forum? It's an unusually dynamic time in politics and people have strong views on both sides. Perhaps keeping CTF for other topical issues, but directing political discourse to a sub-forum would ring fence some of the more robust discussions.

I see a lot of comments about it being banter, but it's not always the case. Yesterday there were insults directed at someone's family which for me crosses a line, no matter the reason. 
I would adopt a zero tolerance approach to personal attacks, insults, racism, religious bigotry etc. I'm not suggesting this is a regular thing on the forum, or that any posters do this. But given we are all opposed to these things, it should be easy to support strong action against it, should it occur.
This would still place the burden on the moderators, but perhaps make it easier to direct Respectful political discourse to the politics sub-forum. If any new posters signed up and evidenced racist insults, personal attacks or insults etc then a single strike policy flowed by a long ban should do the trick. If it's really about banter and debate then this shouldn't be problematic for anyone, not diminish the lively nature of CTF
 



Or move it to its own brand as a political site not a sub site.

Clear rules for CTF, and it doesn’t then dilute the quality or the Migration Australia brand.

Either way proper rules, proper policing, and the overhead of that is still there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Marisawright said:
  1. Leave CTF as a place for general banter
  2. Create a "Current Affairs"  forum (I say current affairs because that covers things like climate change and celebrities as well as politics)
  3. Quarantine the Current Affairs forum, so people can do what they please and it doesn't adversely reflect on the main site.

When I say "quarantine", it might just be that the Current Affairs posts are marked "no follow" and are excluded from the "New Posts" results so we can all ignore it.   

Or it might be that the Current Affairs forum is private, like MBTTUK used to be - I think that would work well, because all the people who would use it are regulars so you can make an announcement and they can all join.

The big advantage of making it private is that the moderators can just ignore it.   

Yes that's what I meant in one of my previous posts   ................  though I suggested it solely for political stuff.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, kungfustu said:

I know that feeling....😂😂😂

Sorry, but you guys can't even be civil on a thread asking why people can't be civil?

Really?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, kungfustu said:

😂.....you sound just like my wife.....she doesn’t think we should be told what politicians are going to do because she finds it so boring.....she says they should just get on and do it and if it all goes wrong.....that’s when we get involved and Sack them off for someone else......😂 

Politicians  🤬  They all get on my pip but yes, I know what you are getting at.  My OH has given up on me.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Toots said:

Now that's a very good idea.  I have zero interest in politics so it would be one thread I wouldn't be interested in but all the other folk who enjoy political banter could banter away to their heart's content.  Left v right  .................  white supremacists v 'lettuce leaves'   ...................  just let them get on with it.  It would have to be respectful of course  .............  is that possible   though?  🤔

How is that any different to just having a post about politics in CTF eg Brexit or Boris etc which you can still ignore today.


I want it all, and I want it now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you also need to consider that this type of debate is isolated predominantly to CTF.....do you want it to spread to other parts of the forum because that could happen If CTF is closed......



Sorry, but that just sounds like a threat not a helpful solution.

If that were to happen, it’d destroy the Migration Australia set of sites, increase work for owners and management of the site, and only build a case, which would be easily enforceable to shut the entire forum and sub sites down, quicker.

To avoid any of that, owners/managers act on reported hate crime or other breaches of the clear, legally enforceable rules and report hate crimes/breaches yourself to relevant authorities. Those who aren’t here to ‘banter’ appropriately will soon go underground - as already stated by some, there are enough sites that cater for that type of ‘banter’. That at no doubt under surveillance or of interest to authorities.



  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ali isn't asking whether people want to keep CTF as how people feel about this section of the forum isn't the issue, it's the unmanageable amount of work created for the mods that is unacceptable. Removing the report button might reduce their need for input but allowing threads to disintegrate into cyber bullying and worse would inevitably change the general atmosphere of the site. For different reasons the same could be said about closing CTF, as PIO would simply become a migration Q&A forum and the friendly community who visit threads such as IKNWC etc would probably disintegrate.
I'm not sure there is a simple answer but I remember similar problems years ago in relation to MBTTUK and one of the main reasons I joined PIO was to offer support to pingpongers on the receiving end of scathing and patronising criticism. Things got so bad that for a while a private section was set up but ultimately it was no longer needed, and thankfully MBTTUK seems a lot more civilised these days.
But I wonder if this approach might work again? i.e. move a complained about thread to a private section and anyone who wants to continue to read or contribute to it must either be a member of the exiled thread section, or apply to become a member? Other than that I have no idea as people will always disagree, some more loudly than others and often without filters of any kind. T x 



That may work, and it makes it easier for those with interests in monitoring crime, mods etc to corral the behaviour.

It still is at odds with being a migration advice site, however and still means work.

Especially since there have already been clear statements made in here already about taking the activity to the main parts of the forum (the migration parts).
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, newjez said:

Tbh, has anyone ever changed their minds on anything posted on CTF?

Whenever an argument is won, it's just met with smiley faces.

I lean a little to the left, but I have an open mind. But whenever I express that I'm met with personal attacks about fence sitting and flip flopping.

In light of the discussion, I'm struggling to see the point of CTF and wouldn't miss it. It must only be used by about a dozen people anyway, who are all entrenched in their beliefs.

The fence sitting is there in all it’s glory.....a few hours ago you was saying let people have some banter.....for some reason now you wouldn’t miss it.....and you wonder where the fence sitting comes from.....make a decision.....and stick to it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Parley said:

How is that any different to just having a post about politics in CTF eg Brexit or Boris etc which you can still ignore today.

The MBTTUK thread at one time was 'closed off'.  Political banter  -  Brexit, Boris, Trump blah blah blah should be too.  It's seems those subjects cause the most angst here and obviously it's made some folk angry otherwise we wouldn't be discussing it - the mods are fed up of it too.  So keep all that stuff 'closed off' except for interested parties.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, newjez said:

Sorry, but you guys can't even be civil on a thread asking why people can't be civil?

Really?

Think it was a bit of sarcasm? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, ssiri said:

 

 


The key is in clear rules and enforcement however. Else not acting on reported hate crimes or other potential issues becomes a liability for those managing/running and/or owning it.

The alternative is to acknowledge the current issues as part of the brand and accept the ensuing real risks.
 

 

 

 Ssiri where would you draw the line...? An example-

Someone posts something negative/ flippant about an African, we get reports or comments its racist, we should remove it and how dare we leave it,

someone else posts a negative/ flippant comment about a Chinese person, we get the same complaints,

someone talks derogatory about a Pom, the same comments are made,

someone says something about Northerner's, Indians, white people, black people, banana benders, the list really is endless and can include every colour or nationality on earth, someone will complain... How should it be policed? Do we ban mention of any race, colour, creed? which makes most discussions nigh on impossible...do we ignore the accusations if its obvious the poster was having a joke but someone dislikes them so complains?(and get accused of playing favorites) Where is the line to be drawn?

The list is endless, if its not sexist, its racist, it's homophobic and so on.. I think it is different now to years ago as some people are a lot more PC so its increasingly difficult to find happy ground to suit everyone. Hence Ali's thread for suggestions as moderator warnings are being completely ignored.. (is that another option? do we do something more than a short ban to those that constantly ignore mod/ admin posts ??? )

Cal x

  • Like 2

If you don't go after what you want, you'll never have it. If you don't ask, the answer is always no. If you don't step forward, you're always in the same place...

If you get a chance,take it, If it changes your life,let it. Nobody said it would be easy they just said it would be worth it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, newjez said:

Sorry, but you guys can't even be civil on a thread asking why people can't be civil?

Really?

Civil? 
google hypocrite.....

ive reported 2 posts since 2009 (I think)....both in the past year from you.....one using my son joining the army to try and ridicule me.....the other was editing a post of mine that you quoted......and you talk about being civil......😂....classic👌

Edited by kungfustu
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Rallyman said:

Think it was a bit of sarcasm? 

But some don't and here is a prime example of how things get out of control from one flippant comment.. (sorry Rallyman, not picking on, you were just right place ,right time but are certainly not the only one to do this).

     Cal x


If you don't go after what you want, you'll never have it. If you don't ask, the answer is always no. If you don't step forward, you're always in the same place...

If you get a chance,take it, If it changes your life,let it. Nobody said it would be easy they just said it would be worth it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 Ssiri where would you draw the line...? An example-

Someone posts something negative/ flippant about an African, we get reports or comments its racist, we should remove it and how dare we leave it,

someone else posts a negative/ flippant comment about a Chinese person, we get the same complaints,

someone talks derogatory about a Pom, the same comments are made,

someone says something about Northerner's, Indians, white people, black people, banana benders, the list really is endless and can include every colour or nationality on earth, someone will complain... How should it be policed? Do we ban mention of any race, colour, creed? which makes most discussions nigh on impossible...do we ignore the accusations if its obvious the poster was having a joke but someone dislikes them so complains?(and get accused of playing favorites) Where is the line to be drawn?

The list is endless, if its not sexist, its racist, it's homophobic and so on.. I think it is different now to years ago as some people are a lot more PC so its increasingly difficult to find happy ground to suit everyone. Hence Ali's thread for suggestions as moderator warnings are being completely ignored.. (is that another option? do we do something more than a short ban to those that constantly ignore mod/ admin posts ??? )

Cal x

 

Indeed, it is different now to years ago, and that’s the world we all live in. This is a migration site. Does off-colour ‘banter’ genuinely misinterpreted, deliberately stated or anything in between have a place on a migration site? Enforce the rules onnn bcc legal basis and they will stop coming, or they will go elsewhere.

 

Another suggestion was corral to a pvt site, Then owners, mods and those with the legal authority to decide what’s ‘PC’ and what’s not can take over.

 

You could enforce longer bans, but if there is form in that type of activity being arbitrary, and value judgement based, rather than in a basis set out in law, it does nothing for the main aims of the forum and can be challenged (and not just on the forum).

 

That’s not good for the brand, at all. As I said what is the point of the brand? That’s the first question to answer, then go from there.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Marisawright said:
  1. Leave CTF as a place for general banter
  2. Create a "Current Affairs"  forum (I say current affairs because that covers things like climate change and celebrities as well as politics)
  3. Quarantine the Current Affairs forum, so people can do what they please and it doesn't adversely reflect on the main site.

When I say "quarantine", it might just be that the Current Affairs posts are marked "no follow" and are excluded from the "New Posts" results so we can all ignore it.   

Or it might be that the Current Affairs forum is private, like MBTTUK used to be - I think that would work well, because all the people who would use it are regulars so you can make an announcement and they can all join.

The big advantage of making it private is that the moderators can just ignore it.   

Sounds a good idea 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×