• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Evolution at Green and Gold Rugby - PLEASE READ

Status
Not open for further replies.

Roundawhile

Billy Sheehan (19)
The only way I can describe it is this :-

This forum used to be like talking to your mates at the pub, there were some knowledgable people and some less so. But more often than not it was the less knowing people that bought up the more intriguing discussion points, and who would take the piss more and make you laugh.

Now it seems to be for the true aficionados only. If your not up to the standard then bad luck.

It seems to me that we are moving towards the "elitist" status which has always held Australian rugby back.

I originally joined this site because it was an "open" forum.

I definitely feel it is moving in the wrong direction.
 
D

daz

Guest
Furthermore, nowadays I sort of get the feeling that some posters are almost too scared to post for fear of being shot down by the hivemind.

I'll address this one specifically.

I don't really think people are too scared to post. Our discussions are still very robust with lots of conflicting opinions. That is good, and nothing has changed in the last few months in that regard, as far as I know.

What has happened, is that people are now starting to think twice before hitting the "post reply" button. The arguments and disagreements are still there, but it is respectful and considered, rather than some of us having a personal sledge or reverting to a nasty/snide comment, which was sadly the norm.

I don't think any of the mods would apologise for that particular change. This is supported by the fact that so many more people have registered; people know they can have their say without being made to feel small.

As for the "sterile" nature mentioned by Roundawhile and Bowside, again I tend to disagree; we still talk about every aspect of the game in the same detail as always. What we don't do now though, is go round and round in circles arguing the same point to death.

If you have thread starting rights, nothing has changed - if you want to discuss something, go ahead and start a thread. But let's recognise that "provocative" is just another way of saying "shit-stirring". We have found that the threads that go down that path not only lead to the most problems and dummy spits, but also really add very little in regards solid subject matter.

Are we going to lose some people who don't like not being able to say that "player x is a wanker"? You bet. But for every one of those we lose, we gained some new blood who would rather discuss the problems with the playing style of player x without reverting to petty/biased/snide crap.
 

Richo

John Thornett (49)
I was someone sceptical about the changes, but generally speaking I think they've been quite successful. Most new posters make positive contributions and I certainly like that there is way less (unfunny, boring, repetitive) shit-slinging. It's also a lot easier to track key threads and discussions are generally more contained and thus less repetitive.

I do agree, though, that there is less variety on the Rugby Discussion page. For instance, in the past, the Beale-Vuna incident would have spawned its own thread rather than clogging up the Rebels 2013 one. Perhaps a wider range of members would have gotten involved in the conversation. Similarly, lots of discussion about Waratahs crowd figures fills up the 2013 thread. While relevant, it does mean the topic of the thread is enormous and snippets of info about players and so on get lost.

I have mixed feelings about the separate sub-forum for the Rugby Matches. It's a pain in the butt to click between them, but it does clean up the other page and keep all the match threads contained. I know there are "watch thread" tools and the like, but I think it would be great to have a single link to that page somewhere easy to access on the Rugby Discussion page -- and vice versa.

Overall, however, I think the change has been positive. I'd like to see a few kinks ironed out, but kudos to the mods for stepping in and arresting the slide that was occurring late last year.
 

Scott Allen

Trevor Allan (34)
If you use the "What's New" button you get a list of all posts in each discussion board that you haven't yet seen - you see both the Rugby Discussion and Rugby Matches posts in one convenient spot.
 

Bowside

Peter Johnson (47)
I'll address this one specifically.

I don't really think people are too scared to post. Our discussions are still very robust with lots of conflicting opinions. That is good, and nothing has changed in the last few months in that regard, as far as I know.

What has happened, is that people are now starting to think twice before hitting the "post reply" button. The arguments and disagreements are still there, but it is respectful and considered, rather than some of us having a personal sledge or reverting to a nasty/snide comment, which was sadly the norm.

I don't think any of the mods would apologise for that particular change. This is supported by the fact that so many more people have registered; people know they can have their say without being made to feel small.

As for the "sterile" nature mentioned by Roundawhile and Bowside, again I tend to disagree; we still talk about every aspect of the game in the same detail as always. What we don't do now though, is go round and round in circles arguing the same point to death.

If you have thread starting rights, nothing has changed - if you want to discuss something, go ahead and start a thread. But let's recognise that "provocative" is just another way of saying "shit-stirring". We have found that the threads that go down that path not only lead to the most problems and dummy spits, but also really add very little in regards solid subject matter.

Are we going to lose some people who don't like not being able to say that "player x is a wanker"? You bet. But for every one of those we lose, we gained some new blood who would rather discuss the problems with the playing style of player x without reverting to petty/biased/snide crap.

But this is my point, what does it matter if there is the odd petty, biased or snide, comment or thread. It's an internet discussion forum, no ones losing sleep over it.

Without the dummy spits and the ideological arguments, the posters here have no identity or depth to them. Its just mindless rugby chatter, rather than some bloke going on a crusade about why "Sydney Uni is literally Hitler", or "what thickness of rope should we use to hang Robbie Deans with" or why "Refs are systematically biased towards the All Blacks" etc.

Again it's not my forum so I'm not going to sit here and make demands, but these are just my thoughts, and I think moving forward the forum is going to get to a point where more posters start to feel this way and then just pack up ship and leave.
 

cyclopath

Stirling Mortlock (74)
Staff member
But this is my point, what does it matter if there is the odd petty, biased or snide, comment or thread. It's an internet discussion forum, no ones losing sleep over it.

Without the dummy spits and the ideological arguments, the posters here have no identity or depth to them. Its just mindless rugby chatter, rather than some bloke going on a crusade about why "Sydney Uni is literally Hitler", or "what thickness of rope should we use to hang Robbie Deans with" or why "Refs are systematically biased towards the All Blacks" etc.

Again it's not my forum so I'm not going to sit here and make demands, but these are just my thoughts, and I think moving forward the forum is going to get to a point where more posters start to feel this way and then just pack up ship and leave.
Petty, biased - there seems to be plenty of that, and no problem. Snide? Well, within reason, no problem. Sarcasm and banter are part and parcel of many match threads and discussions. Personal attacks, which inevitably follows snide after a while? No.
As for posters leaving, well, we'll see. So far, they appear to be joining.
As with any changes we made last year, the system is dynamic, and we will continue to reassess how things are going.
If you, or anyone, wants to throw up some new ideas, we're always happy to hear them. Feedback from long-time posters like you is good, so keep it coming. Not everyone will agree with everything we do, and neither should they, but we have to try to steer a path that keeps most punters happy, and we feel, at the moment, it is better than it was in many respects.
DM me or any of the mods if you like.
 

Richo

John Thornett (49)
If you use the "What's New" button you get a list of all posts in each discussion board that you haven't yet seen - you see both the Rugby Discussion and Rugby Matches posts in one convenient spot.

I know, but it gives you posts from all the other sub-forums too and is thus pretty cluttered.
 

Gagger

Nick Farr-Jones (63)
Staff member
Bowside and Roundawhile - thanks for speaking up - all genuine opinions valued.

One thing's for certain is that we've taken the decision not to make this a Bryce Lawrence's ruck of rugby forums (anything goes). There are other places that do that.

However - I hear you on the homogeneity of threads. If you can't see the eye candy issue in the headline, you're unlikely to view.
 

USARugger

John Thornett (49)
The only way I can describe it is this :-

This forum used to be like talking to your mates at the pub, there were some knowledgable people and some less so. But more often than not it was the less knowing people that bought up the more intriguing discussion points, and who would take the piss more and make you laugh.

Now it seems to be for the true aficionados only. If your not up to the standard then bad luck.

It seems to me that we are moving towards the "elitist" status which has always held Australian rugby back.

I originally joined this site because it was an "open" forum.

I definitely feel it is moving in the wrong direction.

Is it actually the wrong direction though? There are dozens of websites where you can say literally whatever you want about rugby or the players, organizations, other countries etc. This is the only place where you are not allowed to just spout off whatever you feel like saying. I'd rather be called 'elitist' and actually be able to have in-depth discussions and analysis without any of the filler or bullshit that you find on every other rugby forum than to be liked by all at the cost of the one thing that truly makes G&GR special (aside from Lee's/Scott's analysis and Cat's social pages updates).
 
D

daz

Guest
Its just mindless rugby chatter, rather than some bloke going on a crusade about why "Sydney Uni is literally Hitler", or "what thickness of rope should we use to hang Robbie Deans with" or why "Refs are systematically biased towards the All Blacks" etc.

I take your point Bowside, and I agree that we don't want to become sheep and all spout the same line of thought. I don't think that is the case on these boards at all, btw, though I agree that care should be taken that we don't go too far over the other side of safe.

Just as an aside though, and to (hopefully) make my point, the three fictional thread topics you mentioned in your post above would all be candidates for censure the way they are worded.

It is the distinction between calling for Deans to hang, rather than asking why Deans should keep his job, that we are trying to drive. The difference in language is that one is clearly playing the man and encouraging hate speech, and the other is asking for considered thought and reason.

I suppose the differences appear minor on the surface, but setting the tone from post one really does set the tone for the rest of the thread, and hopefully, the board as a whole.
 

Braveheart81

James Horwill (77)
Staff member
Surely the reduction in new threads is solely down to the fact that we don't have new users registereing and starting one of the following threads:

"Quade Cooper should be cruxified"
"Robbie Deans should be burned at the stake"
"The Waratahs suck"

I think the discussion has been more streamlined in specific threads such as for each Aussie franchise and the Wallabies Watch thread has been great for discussing form sides and speculating on Wallaby teams/squads for the Lions tour.

As Daz and others have said above, trying to make people argue their opinion rather than just incessantly stating their opinion as fact makes for more interesting discussion and in depth analysis.
 

Inside Shoulder

Nathan Sharpe (72)
Give it time Braveheart81 - remember QC is still rehabbing and everyone is holding their breath, Wallabies have not assembled or been picked or otherwise given any of us cause to start this year's version of the 2nd thread and the Tahs arent sucking as much as last year!
 

Rassie

Trevor Allan (34)
I'm assuming you get this when trying to start a new thread? Try starting it in the suggested thread forum. From there it can get moved to the right forum
Nope. Wasn't trying to start a new thread in fact I went back and notice there is no new thread button. Its there all the time. Was just wondering why first time I thought it was cause its a new account and maybe what you post have to have admin approval.
 

cyclopath

Stirling Mortlock (74)
Staff member
Nope, you can post where you like, but starting a thread is not automatic, it comes with time.
And no, I'm not saying when!!
 

Sully

Tim Horan (67)
Staff member
Nope. Wasn't trying to start a new thread in fact I went back and notice there is no new thread button. Its there all the time. Was just wondering why first time I thought it was cause its a new account and maybe what you post have to have admin approval.
You should be able to post in any thread you can view. Which Forum were you in?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top