More severe moderation in update threads?

[LukeFF]

Originally Posted by nearmiss

Don't take the baron serious he's older than dirt and twice as ugly.

...and he's also on my Ignore list, because he can never find it in himself to post anything civil.

[major_setback]

There should be two links in each update thread, the update itself then being locked after Oleg has posted his update..

1st link: contains Oleg's statements, questions made directly to Oleg, and Oleg's replies. This is a pure update link.

2nd link: A discussion of the update, and comments made about questions made to Oleg, and any post made in the first link which is not a direct question or suggestion to Oleg - they should be moved here. This is a discussion link.

[tagTaken2]

I believe the moderation of update threads is woeful.

Can't understand why ban hammer is not being used.

Anyone posting anything controversial that is unrelated to the screenshots should get a week ban instantly, and anyone responding should get a one month ban. How hard is it?

Maybe I'm just a bit too old, but isn't "more severe moderation" an oxymoron? (Or, worse yet, a political position?)

[KOM.Nausicaa]

Originally Posted by zipper

Maybe I'm just a bit too old, but isn't "more severe moderation" an oxymoron? (Or, worse yet, a political position?)

Maybe just bad english. Apologies for that.

[winny]

My feelings are that we should be allowed to discuss all things aviation wise.

Some of the subjective stuff (colours, landscape, smoke etc) is ok but ultimately down to personal preference.

Posts which use one screen shot to highlight a 'problem (when there are several other shots that dont) should be deleted.

Political debates such as the Poland discussion in the current update thread have no real place in a thread to do with development updates.

Overall I'm quite happy with the moderation although I have seen some very petty/childish posts from at least one of the moderators in the past.

Ulitmately it's down to the poster to self censor and to consider what effect what they have to say will have on the thread. Plenty of times I've written out a 'you're wrong' post and then not pressed submit because it would have just kicked off.

[JtD]

Definitely more strictly moderated. Repeat offenders should be banned as written down in the forum rules.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by winny

Political debates such as the Poland discussion in the current update thread have no real place in a thread to do with development updates.

I agree completely Winny, even though I was one of the guilty parties.
I posted to calm things down before it turned into a slanging match, which seemed to work ok.

[Igo kyu]

Originally Posted by zipper

Maybe I'm just a bit too old, but isn't "more severe moderation" an oxymoron? (Or, worse yet, a political position?)

That's a conflation of/pun on two different meanings of "moderation" I believe.

[leggit]

if you get annoyed by the chaff on those threads...don't read them....personally i only checkout Olegs posts then i'm done....it seems pointless reading the rest as its 80% crap.

yes thats my opinion someone else will say 30% another 50%...my point is its un-workable....there is a lot of dribble put on this forum...reason being everyone is waiting for bob...point incase the "lets fund C1 development" thread. some people just have nothing better to do with their time.