Zinzan
Well-known member
Get with the program, it's about posting your favourite curries if some of the recent tour threads are anything to go by.Oh no, god forbid cricket discussion take place here.
Get with the program, it's about posting your favourite curries if some of the recent tour threads are anything to go by.Oh no, god forbid cricket discussion take place here.
Well hes actually made 50 threads in the last 2 months so still a fair chance they've been lazy in responding. Still stupid though.So I see how prompt CW moderators can be when they want to. Usually they are lazy af, forgetting to make threads sticky, forgetting to take threads off sticky, turning a blind eye to personal attacks, name calling and insults but when Slippy888 creates a few threads, they're suddenly not lazy and useless anymore
Who's the best mod? Want a couple of choices?cricketweb today i cant do anymore vs threads wtf
Depends what the warning was. If it was "hey, slippy, would you mind cutting back on the mindless comparisons and actually consider using punctuation", that would be entirely fair.Some of his threads were stupid, but he got a warning for this? Jesus. Considering how much crap on here seemingly gets ignored, this is incredibly silly.
No it wouldn't. Moderators are there to enforce the forum rules, not to pass personal judgement on content that breaks no rule.Depends what the warning was. If it was "hey, slippy, would you mind cutting back on the mindless comparisons and actually consider using punctuation", that would be entirely fair.
This seems extremely discordant to me.No it wouldn't. Moderators are there to enforce the forum rules, not to pass personal judgement on content that breaks no rule.
It always happens that moderators become overly officious and I'm always having to lecture the ones on the forums I've created.
Why is that discordant? Moderators aren't a protected species. They need to follow the rules too. If they overstep the bounds of their remit then there are consequences, just like there are for anyone on the forum.This seems extremely discordant to me.
I'm sure the slightly soiled kitchen furniture industry wouldn't have flourished on his watchI blame Loony Bob
Some of the topics he's posted are exactly the same as previous discussion (Flintoff vs Cairns being one), which is actually against the rulesNo it wouldn't. Moderators are there to enforce the forum rules, not to pass personal judgement on content that breaks no rule.
It always happens that moderators become overly officious and I'm always having to lecture the ones on the forums I've created.
And here is that rule:Some of the topics he's posted are exactly the same as previous discussion (Flintoff vs Cairns being one), which is actually against the rules
The rule requires the poster to check back two days to see if it's already been posted. The previous Flintoff v Cairns thread was 7 years ago and the last post in it was 6 years ago.Read before posting - Odds are that most threads have already been covered before you thought of it. Thus just check back a day or two to see if the topic your so curious about has already been played out. It saves your time, and our time, it works out great like that!
Jesus.OP isn't a new member.