PlanetCricket Corruption Crisis

[sohum]

Why not set up an executive committee wherein a person can complain against a particualr mod/globie if he is not happy with him ?

That exists already--they're called administrators.

 

[w3lshrugby]

I haven't been able to read through all of this thread right now. And I don't have anything bad, or good to say - I'll stay neutral from this.
Although, maybe, if the topic of elections is still going on, or even if it isn't - it would just become like one big 'Eastern Eurovision Song Contest' apart from the fact that it wouldn't be a song contest, or not eastern european - but you get the general gist - 'people voting for their neighbours just to be 'nice' or keep 'safe' or just for fun, but not for people who are worthy of the job'

Sorry if that was stupid, just trying to liven the mood a little.

 

[smssia0112]

Otherwise known as sending mixed messages and not being consistent.
I don't think this thread is an appropriate outlet for these issues and I think its both hypocritical and unacceptable for it to be started by a staff member. There is a procedure in place to deal with these things and after posting a thread like this I don't see how the staff are supposed to get on with their jobs.
I have always said if you have an issue with a moderator, global moderator that isn't resolved PM me. How many PM's on the subject have I received this past month? None.

The bottom line is that whilst I, and other admin, are always willing to listen to suggestions to improve the forum this isn't meant to be a democracy. The forum has rules which you agree to follow when you sign up; if you can't follow them then don't post.

I'm sad and angry that people have chosen this way of expressing their disatisfaction; both members and staff. I certainly don't run this forum to come back home and read a thread like this and I will have to consider whether I really want to continuing administering a forum where the members feel free to openly criticise everything about the way we run it and demand such things as elections for moderators.

I've nothing to say except that by choosing to raise the issues in this way, wholly against the spirit of the forum, it's left me feeling hugely disappointed with certain people.

I have read it again, and still see it how I called it before, I still feel that you are discouraging negative feedback, which defeats the whole purpose of a feedback forum.

 

[sohum]

Since I don't feel like starting a new thread to respond to the statement posted earlier, I will use this thread. I disagree specifically with the idea that what members want is a complete lack of rules. If this was used as the basis for any decision that was undertaken, I think it is a completely superficial analysis of the situation. Most members acknowledged the value and importance of rules to this forum. There is no arguing that point. What the problem was is the implementation of the rules. The points in the statement that made it seem like Duff or other members did not want the rules (especially giving the example of this thread) was completely out of context, for the reasons stated above.

 

[Deleted member 9102]

Edit: Chris Gayle

 

[Kshitiz_Indian]

I am sure the mods are mature enough not to take action against duff for this thread

Sorry but i have to take this statement back now

 

[prarara]

Yeah , i can't agree more. Although i haven't been on the other any of the two sides at the moment, i have generally experienced some rash behaviour by mods. This is not a attack at the mods but i'd say some who everybody knows are not in the right way of treatment and to be honest i do not interact and also feel scared to interact with them after a spate of incidents. Although some have been a lot helpfull and very respecting.

I think we need elections every year as the only solution , how and where should be decided. I think more deserving people should be at the vital positions.

I've been to a forum where they do elections, baaaaaaaaaaaaad idea; it becomes really crappy later; maybe some check is needed, I dunno.

 

[sohum]

Is this the thread that is the reason behind Duff's sacking? If so then this is even more stupid than I thought because he doesn't even have a go at anyone! Just says how we can improve and asking people to cheer up, that's all.

I would hazard the guess that what ticked them off more than anything was the thread title. It's hard to read when your eyes are red--ask a bull.

 

[Kev]

I would hazard the guess that what ticked them off more than anything was the thread title. It's hard to read when your eyes are red--ask a bull.

I have so far refrained from posting in these threads and I shall make this one post and that will be it.

The title didn't upset me, I don't think duff meant corruption, I just don't think he could come up with the right word. Even if he did mean corruption it still doesnt bother me.

The content of the thread didn't upset me.

What upset me is that Duff didn't act as part of the team, I thought he knew he could talk to me about any subject and that while I may not always agree with him I wouldn't hold it against him either. To be part of a team, any team there has to be trust. People won't always agree with each other when they work as a team but for me it is unacceptable to go outside of that team without first consulting the members.

 

[Leicester Fox]

I think the reason we don't get as many members is because we need more downloads on the homepage or game related news and less storys fantasycricket etc. PC was mainly for downloads right? So keep it's main page based around that

 

[Jaztheman]

I think if a member see's this thread then they will automatically think it is a bad forum so i think personally we should move on and enjoy the forum for the best it can offer.

 

[ZoraxDoom]

I have finally managed to catch up with everything. I agree 200% with Aus892. PC is getting suffocated, and everyday I find myself being pushed away. I only visit now for Stories, BT, PC Soccer and Cricsim. If Mods got in there, I dunnow what I'd do...

 

[embi]

This thread has turned into a ridicolous MSN conversation.

Haven't been very active recently, but Duff makes a lot of clear points. From the times I have been on, its been clear that there are a few staff members that distinguish themselves from the members. I've always felt that staff members are approachable, despite many complaints about this, the admins have always maintained that a simple PM will do the trick.
All of the mods do a fantastic job generally, its the way they deal with criticism thats the main problem. Ok, so generally the criticism comes in the form of publicly humiliating threads, but maybe staff members could look at having a friendlier approach (which must be difficult, but its part of the challenge of being a staff member).

 

[smssia0112]

I have so far refrained from posting in these threads and I shall make this one post and that will be it.

The title didn't upset me, I don't think duff meant corruption, I just don't think he could come up with the right word. Even if he did mean corruption it still doesnt bother me.

The content of the thread didn't upset me.

What upset me is that Duff didn't act as part of the team, I thought he knew he could talk to me about any subject and that while I may not always agree with him I wouldn't hold it against him either. To be part of a team, any team there has to be trust. People won't always agree with each other when they work as a team but for me it is unacceptable to go outside of that team without first consulting the members.

You use the word 'team' fairly constantly in that post, and the last sentence you say 'without consulting the members.' In the context you have put it, I assume you mean members of the staff 'team' rather than the actual members of the forum.

I could be wrong, but I believe that they are as important as the staff members. The regular members make up about 90% of the members on this forum, so whilst you guys are certainly the men to decide certain things, but we are still important enough to be able to have a voice, and what Duff did was give us a voice.

Perhaps it has been so long since you were a regular member that you have forgotten, but we are actually a group of people just like you staff members, and we actually do enjoy voicing our opinions, and sometimes the only way to do that is to have someone help us out. Duff gave us a voice.

One other thing I say about this so called 'team' is that a team generally competes against another team. You make it sound as if you guys are one 'team', trying to beat the regular member 'team.' I don't think I need to explain that that once again puts us down.

 

[sid_19840]

Seeing this for the first time and its really shattering that its come to this.However Id personally like to see things move ahead instead of pondering on and on,so Id like to give my opinions in the matter(which are solely mine and Im not speaking on behalf of the staff team or anything.)

The forum is for members
There should be equilibrium between the members and staff. Staff members are no better than members and members should be treated with the respect they deserve.
This includes:

Accepting the fact that people cannot type in Proper English.

What we need to understand is that we all acknowledge the fact that all of us cant speak perfect English.But what Id like members to do is to atleast "try" and improve their English,either by reading more at the forum or by learning the basics through ways that may help them.All this is only for other members so that they also understand exactly what each others views and opinions are.

Listening and acknowledging feedback, views and ideas.

Totally,I know for a fact that all ideas are considered especially by the higher staff,even if I dont get the time offlate to read upon things going on at the forum.Whether the ideas are considered or not are upto the staff and their decisions,which is based only on the forum and its members.

Respecting members no matter what race, religion or age they are.

I can never ever in my time at PC felt that the staff(including my days as a member) ever reacting based on race or religion.Its entirely based on the individual and his/her attitude.

It’s a forum for teenagers primarily, not adults.

I dont think the rules are based at an adult level?

Just because a staff member doesn’t agree with a member it doesn’t mean they have to influence them because of their stature.

Ofcourse not.Again Id like to believe that staff members dont do that.However its not something which can be controlled to a fine level by other staff members.Its up to each individual to realise the same and Id like to believe that all of the staff,atleast the ones in the current tenure do the same.Ofcourse I can never be a judge of myself,so I'll leave that to the public and the other staff members.

Staff should interact with members on a friendly level, not at an imposing level.

Without doubt and its definately our initial aim at dealing things.But if people are not ready to accept things or if things get out of hand they must be imposing according to my opinion.

Corruption of Power after promotions

Again its something based on the individual,but I feel that most of the current staff have a level head on their shoulders.Also its possible to get that feeling looking from the outside.

Too Strict

* Members need to be given a second chance.
* Consistency shouldn’t prevail. At the moment it is apparent that staff members are being too harsh in moderating.
* Issues should be reviewed on a case to case basis.
* Thread topics can cover wider issues than the topic at hand. Exploration of other related issues to a topic should be OK. Things such as getting slightly off topic shouldn’t warrant deleted posts or threads closed.
* Members shouldn’t feel shut out or ignored.

1)Members are almost all the time given multiple chances.Im an ideal example after some of the things I did when I was a member.Unless youre posting things totally out of place members are always given multiple chances.

2)What does Consistency not prevailing mean? That we treat people in different ways?

3)Issues are always discussed among staff,and only when the majority of them agree to something is it implemented,so whats the problem?

4)Things getting slightly offtopic is fine imo.That doesnt mean that people should start getting totally out of place,flaming or posting rubbish.Thats when they end up getting deleted.

5)No member is ever ignored,and their opinions are based on how valid they may be.However if a member feels ignored despite this,its not something that can be controlled by the staff,unless someone in the staff is ready to provide free gifts to all members feeling ignored at their expense.

Freedom of Speech

* People shouldn’t be deterred from posting due to fear of thread closure/deletion of posts.
* People should be able express their views without fear of punishment.

Again a similar thing,people are always ready to express as long as its within the rules,and unless they are totally getting offtopic.So if this is kept in mind when people(people i.e everyone including staff and higher staff) post then there isnt any reason to fear.

Again Id like to repeat that these are only my personal views in the matter and what I genuinely feel both as a regular(although the word regular doesnt quite suit me offlate) member and as a part of the staff.