Jump to content

Negative awards


RedRooster

Recommended Posts

  • Moderators

So my thoughts on all of this is that this is actually a pretty friendly forum overall. If you think this place has a bullying problem or is harsh then feel free to go post on other forums and then come back and let me know your experience. Not saying it will be less friendly across the board, but I imagine that you'll either be met with a much harsher welcome or you'll be posting on a forum that has 200+ rules and heavy moderation where you get banned for not using times new roman in your signature - but perhaps that is exactly the type of forum you would prefer. And that to me is the most important thing, this isn't the only wrestling/MMA/weird off-topic forum that exists. There are many and guess what, you can even go off and make one yourself! If you really think that things like negative awards should be gone because they are too harsh on people then there are other forums that don't do that.

 

On the negative awards, I think they are important here, I started them (I think?) because I am a prick, thought it would be funny, and I wanted a way for people to realise that the forum just didn't like how they were posting. People say that the clique decides who gets the award, and yes, paid members nominate people but that group is far from a clique. Then voting is open to everyone! So its easy for the "clique" to not get their way there. The punishments tended to be suspensions, title changes (I don't recall anything other than "Dolt of the Year 2015" etc), and if you won back to back years for the same award you'd get banned. 2 fucking years to change the perception that people have of you!

 

Are negative awards potentially harmful for some people? Yes I could see that. But I'd say that the internet is not a safe place for you to be if you're that much at risk of self-harm to be honest. If you're someone who logs onto the forum, goes into a bunch of threads and makes that don't engage with people and say very little then I would say you're likely to get nominated (or just straight up told) for white noise. If you trot in to threads with some joke that lands flat everytime then you're going to get the "At, Not With" nomination. I'm quite frankly not willing to restrict people from calling those types of posters out, who absolutely ruin forums, just because the poster says they have depression or whatever. I don't believe that depression makes you feel the need to post puns all over the forum and I don't believe depression is a valid excuse for why you should be allowed to get away with it either. However, if you can find me an example of someone who posts about something like depression and then gets mocked and made fun of for it then I'd like to see it - those posters tend to get suspended/banned pretty quickly here.

 

On cliques - I've been on this forum for an awful length of time, we're talking some 20 fucking years. In that time there has always been this notion of cliques, and people always say the same old thing about them having all this power and control over this place. But guess what...the cliques also change seemingly every year or so. Really there are no cliques, there are just popular or respected posters at the time. Unsurprisingly those posters tend to influence the forum in terms of tone and style. Ironically, I can think of many of the popular posters who have been nominated for negative awards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Add me to the pile who finds the whole clique thing mystifying. Isn't it just really shit workers getting up in arms about really good ones? A bit like the real clique? All I see is about 6-8 posters who are genuinely unmissable, who might not agree with you. 

Anyway, the awards. There's been some very decent points made here, but it's all a bit knife edge isn't it? It's kind to be kind, but then sometimes you're just cotton wooling things on a bit too much of a hypothetical. I'm sure Jurassic Park's put someone into a tailspin, but I'm still glad they made it. I've always seen them as slanderous in a really goofy way, like a Big Brother fight night. I agree with the previous point that if someone nominated did send the right kind of PMs though then it's something there's room to budge on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like some others I've been around for quite some time but have mainly been someone who reads and occasionally posts (it shocked me when I checked my profile there and realised it had been 13 years since I joined).

What keeps me coming back every day is that I genuinely enjoy reading all the posts, people's views, debate, humour and of course the support between members in topics such as the mental health thread.

I echo that I don't see cliques. What you do have is regular posters who have been here for years, contribute the most and are also confident to put out their views or challenge others. These are fundamental to a forum but can understandably be challenging to those who don't post much or don't like healthy confrontation.

It is also possible to take things to heart when reading text without the tone of a voice behind it.

All you need to do is look at comments on tweets, YouTube or other social media and that will show you the absolute worst of bullying and I definitely don't see anything like that on here. Nobody is perfect and nobody gets things right 100% of the time but I've always thought this is a decent place, where if issues arise they are resolved. It has to be a decent place for me to spend a good chunk of my day reading it as I've grown from a young 20 year old to now a 33 year old dad (not quite in the 35 year old plus demographic mentioned earlier). 

 

Edited by iMPACt!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/16/2020 at 12:23 PM, PowerButchi said:

They aren't going anywhere. 

 

On 8/16/2020 at 6:12 PM, Keith Houchen said:

The negative awards are the highlight of the year, it’s our Wrestlemania. 

This was the reason I named you both, 2 very dismissive posts that to me say, who gives a toss what you are discussing cos we enjoy these awards that we will never be voted for so they will stay. 

 

I think I jumped on my high horse and for that I will apologise. I think the fact I have now to explain my tenure here after saying I joined recently but Butch deeming that 8 months is not recent and the fact that Butch knows..... From my dozen or so posts..... never posted under a previous account. .. That Keith is a much better person than I am shows the cliques that exist here. 

I will agree that in my 17 years of reading the forum I have obviously formed opinions and I trust that Butch chose the 18 month time limit carefully to find bullying, knowing he has not committed more than passive aggressive posts as highlighted above in this time. 

I really don't have a problem with your annual awards, be them positive, negative or whatever. It wouldn't be something I would read, maybe I'm now in the running cos I don't know what a dolt is. It was the dismisive approach to the topic and the people posting on what I believe is a good forum that made me feel I should voice my opinion. 

 

As you will see I officially joined after lurking all those years because I wanted to chat about AEW, and just to confirm that it took about 3 or 4 months to get approved after registering, which is why I still consider myself new here. 

 

As you were. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...