Mr. Shane wrote:The focus of the message boards needs to return to NBA Live and to distance itself just a bit from the NBA and general talk (which is just stupid bullshit 90% of the time). While those areas are good for variation, there's so many posters in the NBA section who probably don't even play Live or download the rosters or patches or anything
Ripper wrote:I think maybe Andrew and others have lost sight of the main goals. There can't be any fun in policing over generally childish or irrelevant discussions, so why not spend less time policing and more time adding content.
I think that's a good point. The NBA Live forums aren't usually the most troublesome, and many of the rules have been devised to cut down on flames in the General forums.
ruffryder8 wrote:Andreas Dahl, Qweet, James, and Yohance all put being a good member above being a mod. They contribute freely and don't go around locking and moving topics like crazy.
I'll come back to the locking topics later, because that certainly is an issue, but as far as moving topics go, that's just to keep things organised. There wouldn't be much point having different sections if any topic could be posted anywhere.

ruffryder8 wrote:Also, like someone else said, the moderating is inconsistent. The n00b jail thread got locked after 5? posts, but we had a whole thread on "Have you ever smoked weed" that never got locked.
That's a fair call, I can understand the complaint. But it really depends on the topic. I didn't really know what to make of that thread, so I left it to the judgement of another moderator - EG came along first. The difference in topics is that one was a general interest topic, while the other didn't seem to have a purpose.
ruffryder8 wrote:And I think Jackal's and Homer's bans were unnecessary, especially not that long. It was just nitpicking pretty much on each others english, but it is not like any of the two speak %100 correct English. Then getting banned for 2 weeks?
Others have brought up similar points, I don't mean to keep picking on you by quoting you ruffryder.

That wasn't just the result of that thread, basically a decision based on the fact Jackal and Homer have been exchanging shots for a while now. Perhaps it wasn't a correct decision, but the reason behind it wasn't quite so petty.
ruffryder8 wrote:Sometimes just letting all of the steam off like Jackal did is a step in the right direction. Let's hope this can be the second one.
It was still a very immature thing to do, and quite hurtful as it became quite personal. I am open to appeal, but I can appreciate that it may not have seemed that way.
David wrote:Funny how when I said all this "over modding" was stupid months ago I was banned for "insubordination" .... you really want to improve the NLSC then that should be the first thing to go.. the mods/webmaster of this site are no "better" or superirior to any other poster.. they should be treated with respect I agree but people should be alowed to critizise them without fear of deletetion etc.. "insubordination".. seriously..
It's not so much not being able to speak out, it's more a matter of being civil. If someone is warned for flaming, and they respond with "Fuck you, moderator!", that's not really constructive criticism, is it? I don't object to constructive criticism, but I admit that I take exception to snide remarks and personal attacks. When the basic message isn't just "I feel there's a problem with the moderating - you guys are too tight/leniant/inconsistent/whatever" but merely a personal attack, it's kind of hard to take it seriously.
About the word "insubordination" - when I was looking at some other forums to see what kind of rules might help control things in the General boards, that was one of the rules that I saw. It wasn't intended to suggest that the moderators are so much better than everyone else, but rather a concise way of saying someone is repeatedly ignoring warnings for poor behaviour.
David wrote:The mods complain about all the "spammers" and not posting useless posts but I think the mods are the biggest offenders on this forum.. What is the point of posting "Topic moved to" blah blah everytime a topic is moved? Who gives a? It is really annoying when you come onto the forum to read 50 new posts.. and 25 of those are from mods saying "post moved to" etc..
I see your point. I felt that I needed to post a brief explanation/notice about for the posts that are being moved, but if that is unnecessary, it's something that we don't have to do.
David wrote:Also I am going to criticize Andrew because he says he is welcoming it.. and if i get banned.. meh... but if you don't want spammers then why have all the topics "Yay I reached 1000 posts" again who gives a? and why does the webmaster have a countdown to 10,000 posts in his sig? Is it that important? Are you proud to have over 2000 "Your post has been moved" posts? ..
It's a joke, a parody of the board the Pistons had in the 2004 Playoffs. It was meant as a joke, though I can see how it's a little hypocritical.
David wrote:This is the first time in 3 years I have seen Andrew welcome change.. we shall see what changes.. Also I think the forum is the least of the NLSC's concerns.. the site is in terrible shape.. Most links are broken or dead.. It really is poorly maintained in my opinion.. I know you are just going to say.. "David is just saying that because he runs nbalive.org" "the rival site".. Whatever.. but remember I was a member of the NLSC long before I joined .org and I still think the concept that Tim started all those years ago was a great idea. I just think now it is being poorly run.. that is my opinion.. you can just dismiss it as "bitter rivalry" or you can take it onboard and meet the challenge and improve the NLSC to what it should be. Its up to you..
I've always been open to suggestions, but I probably have not done a very good job of showing it. I've always been open to appeals, but attacking me personally is not really making an appeal.
Broken links are obviously no use to anyone. That's something that I'd like to handle with the addition of more staff.
Jackal wrote:*shrug* The moderation is one of the first things that must change. I'm glad others have come forward and said that the moderation is a problem. By keeping it quiet, we didn't help ourselves and we didnt help the forum. We decided we'd just up and leave, we didn't consider taking it up with Andrew for a simple reason, hey...he's the one who picked the Mod, he won't want to listen to us instead of us. Yet, we never actually tried.
(Emphasis in the quote is mine) I can understand why you felt that I would not be open to an appeal...but the fact you jumped to that conclusion makes what transpired somewhat hasty. How could you know for sure that I wouldn't listen to you if you never asked? I know, you expected the worst, and some of my actions are to blame for that. But I think confirmation of your fears would have justified your actions as a last resort.
To throw out a historical example, Ho Chi Minh did not adopt communism and attempt radical revolution in Vietnam until all other means of liberating his country failed. When it became clear that no one was willing to give Vietnam freedom - after a couple of international conferences where the issue was raised - he turned to more drastic measures.
Just the way I see it. But what's done is done, and I think it is in our best interests to resolve our differences and improve the forum, not only so that all the current members feel better about this but the forum is a better place that new members want to be a part of.
EXPLOSIVO! wrote:Probation: I think a new type of punishment should be instituted. Probation should limit the ammount of posts per day or week or month if the user steps out of line. I know this is kind of weird, as I have never seen it in any other forum, but hey, that's just my opinion.
It's interesting, but I get the feeling it would basically be the same as banning or suspension. From what I've read in this thread, most forum members would prefer the last resort moderator action (banning, suspension, etc) to truly be last resort measures, with a member really having to overstep the line for such measures to be considered.
hotshot wrote:Seeing as to how you're open to suggestions... how about a "Banned Users" thread like they have at the .org forums where the mods state the reason for the ban, length of the ban etc? Don't give me all that yap about "copying this copying that". I think this would be a good thing to have in a forum and kudos to the guys at .org for coming up with it in the first place.
I'm open to that idea, but last time a suggestion was made that was taken from a feature on nbalive.org, a couple of the nbalive.org team members openly criticised us for stealing the idea. I'm prepared to adopt features that make the forum better, but I don't want to cause any more NLSC vs nbalive.org problems.
One way or another, the warnings should be more public and more numerous before drastic measures are taken; I certainly get that message, and I agree. I was not aware that it was causing such problems because I was never approached about it. It's not a matter of not wanting to see problems, it's a matter of being shown the problem. But again, what's done is done.
propulsionDJ wrote:The one thing I dislike about this place is whenever we bring up the name "Kobe" in a thread, then it gets locked. Like Kobe8Mvp said before, nobody notices the "Kobe thread" because it's a sticky and it's been there for such a long time. We really don't need it there because half the time, I don't even know what discussions people are having about Kobe. I have to go back 4 or 5 pages to see where everybody is currently at. I think we should get rid of the Kobe thread because it is discriminating to him. I don't see a thread of any other players. And there are so many constructive arguments about Kobe that pop up in other threads. And what's wrong with that???
The Kobe thread was created to control the amount of discussions that were all turning into Kobe related topics. It has been attempted on some other forums (I believe RealGM was one) with players such as Kobe and LeBron.
Perhaps it's time to close or at least unsticky that thread and relax that rule. The only thing is, if 10 different threads spring up about the same Kobe-related topic, that's a little excessive. If that should happen, I think we mods are in the right to either lock or delete those additional topics. But I think people are mature enough to handle the responsibility of keeping down the number of identical topics, so I'm not greatly concerned.
propulsionDJ wrote:As you can see, my main problem with the site is that the threads get locked too early and most of the time, unnecessarily. And that is starting to make me lose interest in this site. When discussions are being killed like that, it makes this site boring.
Told you I'd get back to that point.

I'm certainly guilty of this, unfortunately some of my experiences as admin have resulted in a knee-jerk reaction to posts that are starting to turn ugly. Deleting the offending posts and issuing more warnings about flaming and going off-topic - basically, moderating the discussion so that it stays on topic - sounds like a better idea.
propulsionDJ wrote:And last but not least, I know Andrew is in a difficult position. I know some people are saying stuff about this forum. But in my opinion, It is very hard to run a place like this. And I feel that Andrew deserves to be commended for running this place for so many years. Andrew, I just want to let you know that I really respect you. And this place is still in great shape. And I hope that you look at what people have said in this thread as constructive critisism.
Thank you for the kind words and vote of confidence.

But I realise that the problems are not solved yet. The rules and policies still need to be amended. I want to hear more concerns and ideas for changes.
I'd like to thank everyone for keeping this civil so far. It shows that you do care about the site and are interested in providing feedback that is beneficial to the site. I really do appreciate it.