We're not putting an Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) in place for now, but here is a gentle reminder of what is expected of posters. If the moderators are forced to put an AUP in place then there will be an increase in warnings and banning. No one wants this, including the moderators, so please take a moment before you post to think about what you are writing.

Acceptable Use Policy (AUP)
In the Dog Pound you are expected to abide by the following without exception:
1. You are expected to be civil.
2. You are expected to defend your position.
3. You are expected to focus on the debate, not the poster.
4. You are expected to make a good faith effort to interact with the community.
5. You are expected to use the report button if you have concerns with a post or comment.
6. Do not troll.
7. Do not use slurs, call people names, or threaten violence.
8. Do not discuss moderation issues in public.
9. Do not bring another user’s personal details into comments.
10. Do not spam the board with a bunch of highly similar topics.

Ignore Function
Go to the top of the board and select "User CP". Under "Miscellaneous" click "Buddy/Ignore List". To ignore posts and private messages from specific users, enter their username in the Ignore List. You can separate multiple names with a comma.

We'll keep this thread open for a bit to have people ask respectful questions. This is not the place to complain about other posters.

(08-07-2017 05:26 PM)the_instigator Wrote:  Since this is suppose to be a moderated group at what point should a moderator step in and disallow the same posts that cause all the responses? Chicken or Egg scenario?

Posting the AUP is fine, but unless you do something it doesn't mean much.
At this point it has been allowed for way too long and the board has suffered.

Think of it this way: no one will be moderated for their opinion as long as you stay within the bounds of civility.

This is a place to talk NIU athletics and while it is clear some people have wildly divergent views, it's not a place for people to get so worked up that they make threats or call names. If someone's opinion on a subject is so antithetical to another's point of view, there are two options:

Ignore, or
Reasoned response

If there is not some semblance of moderation (of which there has been but which is never shared with the population as a whole) of people's posting styles then a message board will quickly devolve to the lowest common denominator, which is inevitably simple name calling.

Talk NIU sports. Enjoy the Huskies. Discuss X's and O's. Just don't make it personal.

Thanks Lord Stanley. This is appreciated.

The mods have recently had to give out a fair number of warnings and bans because people couldn't keep things about NIU and not turn things personal. Please do not be so immature that you call other human being names, or can't understand the most basic reality that this is a place to talk, civilly, about NIU Athletics.

While we will not speak about individuals, we are very happy to give second chances, maybe even a third chance, when the time is right.

But please, this is not the place to talk about individuals. It's better to PM the mods if you have comments about others. You will get a response.

(12-11-2017 01:05 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  While we will not speak about individuals, we are very happy to give second chances, maybe even a third chance, when the time is right.

But please, this is not the place to talk about individuals. It's better to PM the mods if you have comments about others. You will get a response.

This is all fine, but who is the judge of civility on this board? Is it a committee decision or one person? What is within acceptable boundaries for some is not for others. For some, you cannot say a negative word. I have seen some obnoxious posters over the years who have called people names who have not been banned. Where is the line?

These are good questions.

Quote:This is all fine, but who is the judge of civility on this board?

The owner of this site has asked certain users to be moderators, and we the moderators are asked to follow certain rules. The csnbbs AUP can be found here: http://csnbbs.com/misc.php?page=aup

Additionally, in this thread at the top there is a general list of things that the moderators have asked the posters to adhere to:

1. You are expected to be civil.
2. You are expected to defend your position.
3. You are expected to focus on the debate, not the poster.
4. You are expected to make a good faith effort to interact with the community.
5. You are expected to use the report button if you have concerns with a post or comment.
6. Do not troll.
7. Do not use slurs, call people names, or threaten violence.
8. Do not discuss moderation issues in public.
9. Do not bring another user’s personal details into comments.
10. Do not spam the board with a bunch of highly similar topics.

Quote:Is it a committee decision or one person?

We work as a team and we are in communication when needed. There are very few examples where the mods have acted independently of each other when making a decision about a poster.

Quote:What is within acceptable boundaries for some is not for others. For some, you cannot say a negative word. I have seen some obnoxious posters over the years who have called people names who have not been banned. Where is the line?

The goal is never to ban someone. But there are posters no longer here for good reasons after being banned, and there are other posters no longer here because we haven't banned other posters. You may not notice as such because we do not speak about other posters being moderated in public. We feel this is very important.

I'd like everyone to please remember that the mods are volunteers, we have other life responsibilities, and sometime our decisions may not be acceptable to some posters, but fine for others. In the end I imagine whatever a mod does about a 1/3 of posters disagree, and all of us have to be comfortable with those disagreements.

I appreciated the gentile reminder and seek to abide by civility and will continue to avoid naming calling , insults etc


I may challenge viewpoints but avoid attacking the poster or the right to hold an opinion contrary to mine.

I personally think this is boring and censorship. It makes for less appealing bosrd. Most views and replies are threads with conflict and controversy. And looking back there was way more activity pre_enforcing. I get not bashing college kids but coaching staff, admin, anyone who gets paid should be fair game. It's only words who cares.

Do moderators get paid?

People bashed randy and he's probably a student who's well connected to players. Hell he might even be a player. And people said maddog, guy who supposedly got banned, was always made fun of and he never attacked anyone. Is that true?

(01-02-2018 08:43 AM)NIUfrank Wrote:  People bashed randy and he's probably a student who's well connected to players. Hell he might even be a player. And people said maddog, guy who supposedly got banned, was always made fun of and he never attacked anyone. Is that true?

I'm not aware that he ever attacked anyone. People made fun of some of his posts which were off the wall and some very repetitive. Don't know why he got banned though. I never had a major problem with him.

Being uncivil isnt the only reason to give people a 30 day board vacation. And I think they get a warning first before a suspension. The main job of the moderators should be to try to keep the integrity of the board up. By that I mean to keep the discussions mostly to Huskie football. I dont care if two guys wanna MF each other, but it derails the thread and might even keep casual posters away. As to MD, he wasn't uncivil. And hes not a bad guy, but he lives to be the counter argument to every single majority opinion. It's a passive aggressive approach to draw out arguments from others. And again, it derails the discussion.

A little of all that is fine. And good for banter. But too much can be a distraction.

I disagree it probably increases discussion. Did his threads have alot of activity and agruments? I'd guess yes, because you need two sides for a good debate. I'm sure he agreed with some majority on some. Was he anti- Carey? That's a majority debate.

(01-02-2018 09:08 AM)NIUfrank Wrote:  I disagree it probably increases discussion. Did his threads have alot of activity and agruments? I'd guess yes, because you need two sides for a good debate. I'm sure he agreed with some majority on some. Was he anti- Carey? That's a majority debate.

It had a lot of comments, yes. But it was usually same 3 people and MD repeating the same argument 30 times in a row.

There's a fine line between a good debate or even heated discussion as opposed to just a cluster fudge of "youre an idiot". When one poster is almost always the guy involved in that cluster, he's manipulating the thread. Spread those same discussions out over 10 different posters and its normal board stuff.

Its an open forum and people should be able to speak their minds freely. Its hard to say what anyone posters intentions are, but the mods have to use their best guess at what's best for the board.

Got ya. I wasn't there. I'll defer to the veterans. If that is reason I still think he shouldn't be banned.

But why was board better years ago? More heated debates or just because team was better?

(01-02-2018 09:33 AM)NIUfrank Wrote:  Got ya. I wasn't there. I'll defer to the veterans. If that is reason I still think he shouldn't be banned.

But why was board better years ago? More heated debates or just because team was better?

Mostly just because the team was better and people were happier. People are just edgier these days with turmoil the team has faced. The board is fine and its great to get new posters and new blood involved. 99.9% everyone is pretty cool.

(01-02-2018 09:38 AM)Rabid Squirrel Wrote:  

(01-02-2018 09:33 AM)NIUfrank Wrote:  Got ya. I wasn't there. I'll defer to the veterans. If that is reason I still think he shouldn't be banned.

But why was board better years ago? More heated debates or just because team was better?

Mostly just because the team was better and people were happier. People are just edgier these days with turmoil the team has faced. The board is fine and its great to get new posters and new blood involved. 99.9% everyone is pretty cool.

I think this is it.

(01-02-2018 11:24 AM)Dog Fan Wrote:  

(01-02-2018 09:38 AM)Rabid Squirrel Wrote:  

(01-02-2018 09:33 AM)NIUfrank Wrote:  Got ya. I wasn't there. I'll defer to the veterans. If that is reason I still think he shouldn't be banned.

But why was board better years ago? More heated debates or just because team was better?

Mostly just because the team was better and people were happier. People are just edgier these days with turmoil the team has faced. The board is fine and its great to get new posters and new blood involved. 99.9% everyone is pretty cool.

I think this is it.

As time has gone on - in social media as well - people hide behind the anonymity of a place like this and really can tend to be downright rude & say things they would never say to a person's face. We as a society are losing our humanity...our compassion for others ..and I think that's sad.

One reason I have stayed away from this board more & more has been due to how nasty some folks have gotten with others. If that is being watched more carefully I applaud the mods.

(01-02-2018 02:53 PM)HuskieFootball Addict Wrote:  

(01-02-2018 11:24 AM)Dog Fan Wrote:  

(01-02-2018 09:38 AM)Rabid Squirrel Wrote:  

(01-02-2018 09:33 AM)NIUfrank Wrote:  Got ya. I wasn't there. I'll defer to the veterans. If that is reason I still think he shouldn't be banned.

But why was board better years ago? More heated debates or just because team was better?

Mostly just because the team was better and people were happier. People are just edgier these days with turmoil the team has faced. The board is fine and its great to get new posters and new blood involved. 99.9% everyone is pretty cool.

I think this is it.

As time has gone on - in social media as well - people hide behind the anonymity of a place like this and really can tend to be downright rude & say things they would never say to a person's face. We as a society are losing our humanity...our compassion for others ..and I think that's sad.

One reason I have stayed away from this board more & more has been due to how nasty some folks have gotten with others. If that is being watched more carefully I applaud the mods.

MD wasn't a part of that problem though. In fact, he was a victim of it.