[QUESTION] closing threads

[Phil E]

fftopic:
All posts about the In Goal thread have been moved to that thread.
Mod

 

[crossref]

fftopic:
All posts about the In Goal thread have been moved to that thread.
Mod

which remains closed, and despite that, another mod post is added !

 

[The Fat]

Because it just serves to confuse new referees and achieves nothing apart from feeding peoples pet points.

This^^^^
It is my understanding that the core purpose of this site is to educate via discussion/Law reference/management tips.
A lot of people who visit the site are either new or inexperienced referees looking for some guidance/help/life line from the more experienced referees on here. That goal is becoming more and more distant, pushed away in some threads where some posters have decided that they are going to argue a particular point till the day they die. The inexperienced ref who was looking/hoping for a straight forward answer gets dragged into old circular arguments and has to then try to make some sense of 100+ posts to get that answer (if they can be bothered to stay the distance).
At some stage it is fair and reasonable for a Mod to make the decision to close that type of thread.

I sometimes wonder what visitors and new members of the site think when they read such threads. "Bloody hell! No wonder no-one can understand some referee's decisions during a game. These guys can't even agree with each other. They're like a bunch of headless chooks running around in circles".

Let's all remember the new/inexperienced referee seeking enlightenment when posting replies and leading discussions in different directions.

 

[Ian_Cook]

This^^^^
It is my understanding that the core purpose of this site is to educate via discussion/Law reference/management tips.
A lot of people who visit the site are either new or inexperienced referees looking for some guidance/help/life line from the more experienced referees on here. That goal is becoming more and more distant, pushed away in some threads where some posters have decided that they are going to argue a particular point till the day they die. The inexperienced ref who was looking/hoping for a straight forward answer gets dragged into old circular arguments and has to then try to make some sense of 100+ posts to get that answer (if they can be bothered to stay the distance).
At some stage it is fair and reasonable for a Mod to make the decision to close that type of thread.

I sometimes wonder what visitors and new members of the site think when they read such threads. "Bloody hell! No wonder no-one can understand some referee's decisions during a game. These guys can't even agree with each other. They're like a bunch of headless chooks running around in circles".

Let's all remember the new/inexperienced referee seeking enlightenment when posting replies and leading discussions in different directions.

Worse yet, there are some members (they know who they are) who have decided that they don't like the way a particular Law is applied, so they try to use another Law (usually the advantage Law ) in an attempt to circumvent THE INTENT of the Law they don't like.

This sort of clever-dick re-imagining of the Laws is completely out of order for referees. It only serves to confuse the players and new referees, as well as making a rod for the back of next week's referee, who will interpret the Law the way that 99.9999% of his peers do, i.e. in accordance with their Union's GMGs and their their Society's guidelines.

 

[Ian_Cook]

which remains closed, and despite that, another mod post is added !

I thought the thread had been re-opened by the mod who moved the other posts there. When I realised the thread was still closed, I removed my post!

 

[crossref]

Fair enough, well done

 

[Dickie E]

At some stage it is fair and reasonable for a Mod to make the decision to close that type of thread.

I disagree. IMO the role of a mod is twofold: address offensive posts and merge threads that should be merged. There used to be a third and that was to delete spam. But I don't see that anymore.

Boredom with a thread, thinking a poster is a prat, etc is not justification to moderate.

 

[The Fat]

I disagree. IMO the role of a mod is twofold: address offensive posts and merge threads that should be merged. There used to be a third and that was to delete spam. But I don't see that anymore.

Boredom with a thread, thinking a poster is a prat, etc is not justification to moderate.

Well how about this suggestion then Dickie.
If a topic has been done to death previously and the subject is again raised (which is likely to happen) by a new/inexperienced ref who is looking for a straight answer, if the poster/posters who don't want to help the new guy out but instead want to continue arguing their lone stance, could they perhaps just post something like, "I don't agree with the general concensus and would like to argue my point in a new thread (insert link) for anyone who is interested", then those who want to continue arguing can go to that thread and others can help the new guy out. The new thread title could be, Arguing Re: ......................

How would your Referee Association handle a member who turned up at every meeting wanting to argue the same view on a piece of Law even when advised from more knowledgable/higher ranking refs that their view was not supported in Law. Would everyone else, hoping to learn something at the meetings, look forward to going over past ground again and again? Would that help new members?

I really think that sometimes there are threads that just decend into the kind of crap you get on the Rugby365 public forums etc and simply end up helping no-one and in some cases are quite destructive. At some point, I think a Mod should be able to lock such threads.
That's just my honest opinion on the matter.

 

[Dickie E]

If a topic has been done to death previously and the subject is again raised (which is likely to happen) by a new/inexperienced ref who is looking for a straight answer, if the poster/posters who don't want to help the new guy out but instead want to continue arguing their lone stance, could they perhaps just post something like, "I don't agree with the general concensus and would like to argue my point in a new thread (insert link) for anyone who is interested", then those who want to continue arguing can go to that thread and others can help the new guy out. The new thread title could be, Arguing Re: ......................

good idea

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

Gentlemen, gentlemen,

Can't we all just get along? It is Christmas time, please be filled with joy and forgive others.

If this is politically incorrect in your country, Happy Holidays you effin grinch.

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

Stepping out of my trailer, I never encounter words like Sepo, Bollocks, or 'er indoors. I am very unfamiliar with the funny talk and clever quips of rugbyref posters.

Please consider this, Mr Burns may have asked for Mediators, but "moderators " was the desired job duty that was heard.

Incoming refs need to know all the arguments and every side of each argument, as they will encounter all the arguments on the park.
Incoming refs are smart enough to learn to make their own decisions. They can determine what is BS

The is the folly of the game, every Saturday will be different. Sit back and observe fans, coaches and refs and players. The game is really just a goofy game. When you die, no-one will give an F what you thought

 

[Dickie E]

I really think that sometimes there are threads that just decend into the kind of crap you get on the Rugby365 public forums etc and simply end up helping no-one and in some cases are quite destructive. At some point, I think a Mod should be able to lock such threads.
That's just my honest opinion on the matter.

I liken chat rooms like this to a cocktail party (but without the cocktails).

Pockets of conversation start up & end and people are free to join & leave as they see fit. If you get sick of a conversation or the manner in which it is being conducted, bid farewell and move on. Sometimes the conversation runs out of steam and everyone moves on. Sometimes, a couple of diehards want to keep at it. So be it. Knock yourselves out, boys.

What I'm not so keen on is someone making unilateral decisions about which conversation can and can't continue. Remember, supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.

You may be interested to know that Robbie asked me to be a moderator several years ago, to some degree because he saw me as reliable (well, I'm always here, aren't I?) but mainly because my time zone meant I could detect and delete spam before you guys saw it. I need to remind myself sometimes that just because I wear my undies on the outside, doesn't mean I can jump off tall buildings.

 

[Dickie E]

Gentlemen, gentlemen,

Can't we all just get along? It is Christmas time, please be filled with joy and forgive others.

If this is politically incorrect in your country, Happy Holidays you effin grinch.

I wished my American boss Merry Christmas. Was that a CLM?

 

[Ian_Cook]

..just because I wear my undies on the outside, doesn't mean I can jump off tall buildings.

Stop it!. Just stop it!

A short(ish), hairless Australian wearing daks outside his trousers is one of those things that, once visualised, cannot be unvisualised. I didn't need that just a few days out from Christmas!

 

[crossref]

Meanwhile OB.. has posted AGAIN on the closed thread
So thats three moderator posts after the post was closed (Ian deleting his)
It does seem like this is a topic where the moderators feel that there is still more to say.. but not by anyone else

 

[OB..]

Meanwhile OB.. has posted AGAIN on the closed thread
So thats three moderator posts after the post was closed (Ian deleting his)
It does seem like this is a topic where the moderators feel that there is still more to say.. but not by anyone else

IN post #19 Phil; E announced that he had closed the thread. A post from you appeared at #23, and I replied to that.

 

[Phil E]

My fault, I moved the answers on here to the closed thread to try and avoid this thread becoming an extension of the closed one.
As everyone (well one or two really) seems intent on continuing an argument that has been gone through several times already I will reopen the thread and you can knock yourselves out.

I would just like to say though that there is a lot of experience on the forum, but many times now less experienced people seem determined to buck the status quo and insist they are right even when shown differently, or even when told "the law ain't perfect, but thats the way we do it in RFU land" (insert country of preference).

By all means have a debate, but not over and over again droning on in some personal crusade. The only thing this achieves is to totally confuse new referees who, if they want to move up the ladder, will need to follow convention.

It never used to be like that on here.....now it seems the lunatics are intent on taking over the asylum!

 

[crossref]

Shrug , if it's a topic that's still open for debate then I will join in. If it's closed for debate I'll shut up
If it's open for debate but only on specific threads,i will keep to those threads.

The mods just need to make up their minds

 

[L'irlandais]

What's a Mod?

Mods were a subculture, that began in the United Kingdom in the 1960s and spread, in varying degrees, to other countries. A small number of them appear to have chosen RRF to make their last stand.

 

[SmeejDad]

Just to speak up as a new member and referee:

I often search for old threads on topics on which I need advising, and often this is very beneficial, but it does tend to take a lot of muddling through complicated debates. Often the thread will start with a simple answer to a question, which would be satisfactory to me, but then descends into a complicated debate - all of which I feel compelled to read through fear of misinterpretation and shoddy law application during a match. If there was a way of retrospectively highlighting what the general consensus is on the thread so that new members could direct themselves straight to it that would be really beneficial... even if everyone just gives it a load of likes? I don't know how this would work.

I must say though that, the site as a whole, has been the most valuable recourse I have come across since taking up the whistle and I really value the support and advice from all members. So thank you!