• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

January transfer window: Your shout

Should rumours from ITKs and journalists be posted in separate threads?

  • YES, two separate threads.

    Votes: 21 53.8%
  • NO, all rumours in one thread.

    Votes: 18 46.2%

  • Total voters
    39

Crawley

Board Legend
Guys, with the January transfer window looming large, we have been listening to some ideas arising from the last window, about how you all would like GG to tackle this delicate subject.

The mods feel a sub-forum of SN & V is the way to go, with dedicated threads therein.

For example, we are considering a "read only" thread where ITK and other rumours can be posted purely so occasional posters/lurkers can go and simply read up on the latest gossip, and then go on to discuss said rumours in other, more dedicated threads.

OR..........we could allow some discussion within the actual rumour thread itself.

The main thing is, we would like this sub-forum to be largely self-moderating. i.e. once the rules are set, we don't want to have to keep jumping in and deleting or merging threads and posts.

We would like to put this to a poll, but want options first.

Over to you.

(Will add poll once we have some options)
 
To add some random ideas/thoughts:

The "read only" would be open for everyone to post in, but only rumours/links, no discussion.

All rumours, ITK, twitter etc. MUST come with a source/link. Just because something's on twitter doesn't make it crap, a lot of journos and slightly clued up people use it as well, hence the need to know who posted it originally.

Separate threads for discussing individual players. Some places demand a link before you start discussing a player, but don't think that's necessary. We all know that the fine people of GG are far superior to any scout. No joke. Well, maybe a little. ;)

Separate ITK from everything else as a 'don't read if you don't like' thread?
 
I think the read only thread is completely unsustainable and hasn't worked once in the past.

Bits of info will be copy-pasted inevitably across in the 'discussion' thread so what's the point if we can't discuss the rumours themselves?

What was wrong with the system up to now, out of interest?

One massive thread with daily updates - those who come in late simply ask around and within minutes are up to speed. As soon as something 'significant' takes place - all discussion topic is re-alligned within minutes and so the spin-offs can commence. I think that worked well in the summer - the signings then recieved individual threads and all tactical discussion moved within those

And If you want a read only ITK thread - why don't we just provide a link to SC, etc. (that is not a sarcastic comment, btw)
 
Last edited:
So my suggestion would be

- a Sticky link to SC' ITK - all nicely summarised and for all to view without discussion - why should we replicate the same thing on here since it's already done.

- a general thread for discussions around all those links

- individual player threads for concrete / near complete targets

I don't think a sub-forum is necessary - traffic is so low during the day anyway and would further suffocate discussion in SnV which is already decreasing on week-days.

My 2 cents
 
Last edited:
All rumours, ITK, twitter etc. MUST come with a source/link. Just because something's on twitter doesn't make it crap, a lot of journos and slightly clued up people use it as well, hence the need to know who posted it originally.

Other than the official Spurs feed and a few of our players (at least the once who don't type rubbish) - how can we establish what is flimflam and what is credible on teletext?

What criteria would you be using?

Can we conclude that the charlatans who got it all wrong in the summer are now rendered void of any credibility or is that up for discussion?

- i.e. jetset, akqayid, insider, agent ITK, etc.
 
Last edited:
Other than the official Spurs feed and a few of our players (at least the once who don't type rubbish) - how can we establish what is flimflam and what is credible on teletext?

What criteria would you be using?

Can we conclude that the charlatans who got it all wrong in the summer are now rendered void of any credibility or is that up for discussion?

- i.e. jetset, akqayid, insider, agent ITK, etc.

By credible I mean a name, a real person. Newspaper feeds, journalists, someone known to be involved in football (ex players/managers). Not some random faceless dude. Based on who posted it, everyone can make up their own mind as to how reliable the info is.

Separating ITK into a thread of its own would remove some the bashing and calling of names as they didn't all get everything wrong. Agent_ITK has always been an obvious fraud, but JJetset and Aqkayid get some stuff right, again people can make up their own minds and there's no need to ban their info just because some don't like it.
 
I think the read only thread is completely unsustainable and hasn't worked once in the past.

Bits of info will be copy-pasted inevitably across in the 'discussion' thread so what's the point if we can't discuss the rumours themselves?

What was wrong with the system up to now, out of interest?

One massive thread with daily updates - those who come in late simply ask around and within minutes are up to speed. As soon as something 'significant' takes place - all discussion topic is re-alligned within minutes and so the spin-offs can commence. I think that worked well in the summer - the signings then recieved individual threads and all tactical discussion moved within those

And If you want a read only ITK thread - why don't we just provide a link to SC, etc. (that is not a sarcastic comment, btw)



Arcy, just to point out, this has come about as a direct response to requests (and moans) from other posters on here, who quite simply hated having to wade through pages and pages of total brick, petty arguing, off-topic meanders (bloody formation discussion in an ITK thread?) etc etc.
Comments have proved there is a susbstantial number out there who simply want to read the goss, and not discuss it over the next 3 pages.

The ideas posted are not mods ideas.....they are the thoughts of posters on this forum. We are trying to help here........try and be a little less dis-proving if you can?
 
Separating ITK into a thread of its own would remove some the bashing and calling of names as they didn't all get everything wrong. Agent_ITK has always been an obvious fraud, but JJetset and Aqkayid get some stuff right, again people can make up their own minds and there's no need to ban their info just because some don't like it.

Would it then not be wiser to simply link SC for that?

But even if you make a read-only thread here - I can guarantee you 150% the posts would be copy-pasted into the discussion thread and debates would be spawned from that - for better or worse. i.e. those bashing would be bashing and those creaming would be creaming. Or in other words - I fail to see how a closed thread would prevent that bearing in mind Crawley did it once and gave up after 2 days, iirc.

Unless the function would be one of a live newsfeed encouraging site traffic which is another story and I can understand where Scara's coming from.
 
Arcy, just to point out, this has come about as a direct response to requests (and moans) from other posters on here, who quite simply hated having to wade through pages and pages of total brick, petty arguing, off-topic meanders (bloody formation discussion in an ITK thread?) etc etc.
Comments have proved there is a susbstantial number out there who simply want to read the goss, and not discuss it over the next 3 pages.

The ideas posted are not mods ideas.....they are the thoughts of posters on this forum. We are trying to help here........try and be a little less dis-proving if you can?

I'm not disproving in the slightest - even gave my own personal suggestions in the next post.

Simply wanted to understand for myself what has given fruit to this sudden change of forum ethos and approach to transfer discussions in general
 
Would it then not be wiser to simply link SC for that?

But even if you make a read-only thread here - I can guarantee you 150% the posts would be copy-pasted into the discussion thread and debates would be spawned from that - for better or worse. i.e. those bashing would be bashing and those creaming would be creaming. Or in other words - I fail to see how a closed thread would prevent that bearing in mind Crawley did it once and gave up after 2 days, iirc.

Unless the function would be one of a live newsfeed encouraging site traffic which is another story and I can understand where Scara's coming from.


Couple of points.........

We did not have a read only thread. I started two threads, one of which was to post ITK, the other for different types of story. The idea was to discuss the stories elsewhere, but it didn't work because people just couldn't help themselves and it fell apart.

The other thing is, where you say 150% of the posts would be copied into other threads and discussed there, well, thats the idea.........allow a thread for viewing the info only, then take the discussion elsewhere.
 
The other thing is, where you say 150% of the posts would be copied into other threads and discussed there, well, thats the idea.........allow a thread for viewing the info only, then take the discussion elsewhere.

Yes, I believe that would be largerly the case and wouldn't prevent ITK bashing, petty arguing, tactical tossery, general chat, spammers, etc. - i.e. ending up with the same ol' massive clusterfudge of a thread in addition ot a live-feed 'locked' one

Unless I've misunderstood something and that's the suggestion itself - in which case - fair enough. Could be convinient for many who simply want to 'view and go'.

Point remains - those moaning about 'chaos' would still have to waddle into one should they wish to engage into any form of discussion - and I believe they need to accept that's the forum' Zeitgeist - for better or worse - i.e. general population's line of thinking, average age, etc.

As you pointed out - 'discussion' threads are virtually impossible to moderate unless there are some radical new interventions on the way.
 
Last edited:
Yes, I believe that would be largerly the case and wouldn't prevent ITK bashing, petty arguing, tactical tossery, general chat, spammers, etc. - i.e. ending up with the same ol' massive clusterfudge of a thread in addition ot a live-feed 'locked' one

Unless I've misunderstood something and that's the suggestion itself - in which case - fair enough.

Point remains - those moaning about 'chaos' would still have to waddle into one should they wish to engage into any form of discussion - and I believe they need to accept that's the forum' Zeitgeist - for better or worse - i.e. general population's line of thinking, average age, etc.

As you pointed out - 'discussion' threads are virtually impossible to moderate unless there are some radical new interventions on the way.



And this is where it becomes self-moderating...........if the resulting discussion thread turns to brick, it would be the fault of no-one but the posters involved, and hopefully you lot can keep it sane. But the people who wish to solely READ the goss can do so in the read only.

Sure, the idea is identical to SC, but with a GG atmosphere to it.

As stated, the idea would be to allow as many "other" discussion threads as you feel necessary, but all based around the info to hand at the top of the sub-forum.

Anyway................anyone else have any thoughts?
 
How about a ITK/journo/source bashing/discussion thread in there somewhere?

Got all kinds of tiring to have that discussion pop up every time someone posted some information.
 
How about a ITK/journo/source bashing/discussion thread in there somewhere?

Got all kinds of tiring to have that discussion pop up every time someone posted some information.

Once again, you lot are free to start any thread you feel necessary.
 
Sub forum with a general chat, a read only and threads for players we have been credibly linked too would be a good shout imo.



Most people were complaining that they couldn't come on and find out what had happened during the day in the mega thread because there had been like 100+ posts since they last looked at it, the read only thread would solve this.


Threads for players we have been credibly linked too would be good, as the discussions about our 'definite' targets would not get lost in the mix.


Finally the general chat is good because sometimes people start talking about players they want, or that they think would be a good shout, rather than players who we might actually be in for.


Sounds like a good plan to me.
 
Sub forum with a general chat, a read only and threads for players we have been credibly linked too would be a good shout imo.

Most people were complaining that they couldn't come on and find out what had happened during the day in the mega thread because there had been like 100+ posts since they last looked at it, the read only thread would solve this.

Threads for players we have been credibly linked too would be good, as the discussions about our 'definite' targets would not get lost in the mix.

Finally the general chat is good because sometimes people start talking about players they want, or that they think would be a good shout, rather than players who we might actually be in for.

Sounds like a good plan to me.

I can agree witih most of that - but why a sub-forum?
 
How about a ITK/journo/source bashing/discussion thread in there somewhere?

Got all kinds of tiring to have that discussion pop up every time someone posted some information.

I think that this is a good idea. I found having to read the same people bashing the same ITKs every day really boring.
 
I can agree witih most of that - but why a sub-forum?


So it doesn't all get in the way of the 'Football' discussion. If you have everything in one place SN&V will become extremely cluttered and you will have people making more than one thread about player 'x' because the first one has gone back so far they couldn't find it.


I dislike clutter. :p
 
I can agree witih most of that - but why a sub-forum?

Because, by the time we reach mid January, I suspect if it were on SN & V, the entire front page would simply have thread after thread of discussions about linked players and their merits. To the detriment of other, just as valuable, threads on non-transfer subjects.

Would only be a temporary sub-forum. Not a permanent fixture.
 
Back