Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Tumbleweed

Is there a growing attitude problem on this Board??

Recommended Posts

Now I am not as regular a poster as some but I come here quite often to see the hot topics of debate. Much of it is good, but there seems to be a growing tendency that anything other than a ringing endorsement of everything that happens and exclaims of delight at every point dropped is greeted with howls of derision and condemnation for being a "moan" or "negative" or "destructive" etc.

For example I put out a post asking whether David Bentley deserved his place and some comment was distinctly unhelpful suggesting that to consider such a question was near heresy. Somone recently suggested that Hux is a liability- well we may not share that view but let us hear what the reasoning is and challenge that assertion on its merits. Few of us would agree, but no doubt the poster has his own ideas on why he believes it to be so.

Yankee Canary is often deliberately provocative and again we may not agree but generally he tries to support his statements with a reasoned argument. Destructive unsupported statements or ill thought out rants are of course fair game- if you can''t be bothered to explain things then it may be best not to bother.

The magic of the Board has been that we have different views, some strongly held, others not and many different debates going on simultaneously. If this vibrancy is to continue surely we must foster an evironment where views can be expressed and if properly reasoned and argued should not be denounced with a retort that the poster must be a blue scum or never been to FCR.

Now we all disagree on some things: fair enough. But this Board serves as a forum for debate and opinions to be aired. We all have our own reasons for holding them. The trend that dismisses them so aggressively is a bit alarming.

At the end of the day we all want the same thing: NCFC to be successful. We just have different ideas on how to get there. Am I on my own is seeing this trend or do any others have any different perspectives?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That''s complete nonsense.

There are no sycophants on this board, and by suggesting there is, you have disproven your own stand-point about "constructive debate".

So what if people say "trust in Nigel"?? They do have a point - he did do what no other manager has been able to do in 9 years. That gives him (and his supporters) some leverage.

There IS a good reason to defend Gary Holt, or Mat Svensson, or Helveg and Jonson too for that matter. And Huckerby''s defensive ability.

Just because people want to defend our players (and our heroes), doesn''t make them sycophants.

I think healthy debate comes from the fact that some people want to defend, and some want to attack. Some are reactionary and some are proactive. Some are followers, some like to be followed. Who cares?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed Tumble, yes there is! As someone who quietly suggested in the "Hucks is a liability" post that if he was injured the side might be easier to pick and slightly better balanced, i was disappointed with the venom and obnoxiousness of many of the responses. It is not in the spirit of this board.

The early members created an environment of healthy reasoned and fair debate, a platform where people could view their opinions and thoughts whatever they may be.

Have we lost this now? There is another board people can go to where anyone can be as obnoxious and offensive as they like. People should take their wrath there. We always used to provide an alternative here, lets keep it that way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as long as things don''t become offensive and personal, one member on my site rates Holt  and I don''t ..we get on share our views stay mates and support the team....whatever.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tumbleweed, I came and started posting in this forum because it did not suffer from the same level of personal abuse that many other forums did. For the main part this forum put up discussion points that were debated in a strong and constructive fashion.

However, of late there has been a number of threads that have been posted to provoke some discussion that have been the target of the personal rebukes rather than constructive comebacks. I certainly hope it isn''t a trend that will continue, but only time will tell.

Perhaps our moderators can instigate a "yellow card"/"red card" scheme for noters who post responses that are simply abusive and counter-productive. Let''s face it this is a moderated forum.

The whole beauty of community forums of this type is that they allow people to express their own views whether they are positive or negative about the topic under discussion. As long as we continue to get discussions that show balanced posting by the members I don''t think we have anything to worry about. If there''s personal abuse I think there are enough level headed members who can post comebacks that may influence the "abuser" to post more meaningful and constructive responses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a1- I read your post and I thought it was excellent and a damn good question - what on earth would happen if he got injured or suspended? I thought when I read it that others might not read it properly and get your point. My fear is that if posters become afraid of personal attacks and vitriolic responses then it will stifle this sort of debate by making posters think twice about getting close to being "off message" or controversial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Personal attack/abuse towards another poster is one of the criteria we use for editing or deleting posts so I''m surprised one or two have slipped through the net. Will keep a close eye on this in the future.

As for a yellow and red card system, it was discussed but seemed pointless as a banned member can just re-register under a different name/email address and some people may find it fun to try to get a yellow card and see what would and wouldn''t be allowed - that would just waste our time and theirs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a poster was described as a tosser (by direct implication) and an idiot in the Huckerby thread. If that doesn''t count how far can you go?

My point is less specific, its about the general tone of disagreement or admonishment which can still be aggressive without resorting to actual abuse or insults.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That does count. Surprised it got through to be honest. Unless the moderator at the time was also looking at the EDP forum where nobody seems to get on with anyone else!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the points that you have made Tumbleweed.  There is a tendency for posters on this forum to "attack" any point of view that is seen as being critical of decisions made, the regime, the management or individual players. There is also a tendency to put "labels" on posters who do not prescribe to the view that everything is okay at Carrow Road.

It is a fact that different people hold different views, and they should be able to state those views, whichever side they are on, without receiving seemingly automatic condemnation.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree, nobody should be condemned for putting forward a logical viewpoint. But in my view, we have bigger things to worry about than "Worthy''s fallen out with an ex-Forest ex-Canadian international winger".

Look at Arsenal - they haven''t lost in 48 games and their players still fight on team buses!!! If that happened at Norwich, I dread to think what posts we would be reading. Every team selection issue is deemed to be "Worthy falling out" with every player under the sun. Remember Hucks injury over summer? You are going to end up getting a bad reaction for rumours like that, because they can''t all be true.

After all, surely we all want to believe the GOOD things about our beloved club rather than dwell on the bad things?

Don''t we?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I regret my two-penneth was taken so personally - bananaman. it certainly wasn''t intended so. We may not agree 100%. all i was trying to say (badly it seems), was there are some, who despite the fact we''re bottom don''t accept any criticism at all which is wrong. I have no problem with any viewpoint.

All I can say, is that its usually obvious when someone is delibarately trying to be provocative and the best response really is really to ignore it and they''ll get bored and move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Don''t worry, I may have taken it personally, sorry. But I do feel a bit like I''m the only one when I jump to the defence of my beloved team!I find it difficult to turn on people that have brought me so much happiness (Holt, Svensson and all the rest) and hold out hope that Helveg and Jonson will bring me yet more fun. Even when they are not playing too well.I will listen to any constructive views on team changing etc, but some of the mindless people who have been slagging off our players (at the matches) I would like to punch. Those people are out of order, but then they could never work a computer to come on here and express themselves! The arguments on here are mostly well thought out, and I agree with Tumbleweed''s initial post - they shouldn''t be condemned for suggesting a change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...