Skip to main content

RRG - Community standards and participation guidelines

The Russian Junior team enjoy some fresh air in Sofia after a hard competition.  Clockwise, from top left : Olga Bulgakova (head coach), Aleksandra Buzdalina (masseuse), Artem Voinov (team coach), Seda Tutkhalyan, Daria Skrypnik, Anastasia Dmitrieva, Maria Bondareva, Angelina Melnikova.  Courtesy : RGF


I like comments and discussions, and most of them on this blog are well informed, polite and interesting.  Please do keep posting!

However, in past days, some of the comments on this blog have been downright rude, to the extent of attacking the person, rather than arguing the point.   Passionate debate and strong opinions are encouraged, but not name calling, bullying or aimless contradiction of the last post.  I have deleted the worst ones, using a 'light touch' for now.  I will, however, have to consider further action if individuals persist in behaving so immaturely. 

It is time to establish some rules of participation; The best ones I have found are at the website of British newspaper The Guardian.  Let's try to adhere to them here.  Please take time to read them, and do please add to them in the comments if you have any thoughts :-)

There are some more articles to come out of Russia and I expect some of you will find them controversial.  I will be posting by the end of the week.

The following section (in italics) comes from http://www.theguardian.com/community-standards

The most important things are:

In short:

- If you act with maturity and consideration for other users, you should have no problems. 
Don't be unpleasant. Demonstrate and share the intelligence, wisdom and humour we know you possess.
Take some responsibility for the quality of the conversations in which you're participating. Help make this an intelligent place for discussion and it will be.


The Guardian Guidelines:

There are 10 simple guidelines which we expect all participants in the community areas of the Guardian website to abide by, all of which directly inform our approach to community moderation (detailed below). These apply across the site, while moderation decisions are also informed by the context in which comments are made.

1. We welcome debate and dissent, but personal attacks (on authors, other users or any individual), persistent trolling and mindless abuse will not be tolerated. The key to maintaining the Guardian website as an inviting space is to focus on intelligent discussion of topics.

2. We acknowledge criticism of the articles we publish, but will not allow persistent misrepresentation of the Guardian and our journalists to be published on our website. For the sake of robust debate, we will distinguish between constructive, focused argument and smear tactics.

3. We understand that people often feel strongly about issues debated on the site, but we will consider removing any content that others might find extremely offensive or threatening. Please respect other people's views and beliefs and consider your impact on others when making your contribution.

4. We reserve the right to redirect or curtail conversations which descend into flame-wars based on ingrained partisanship or generalisations. We don't want to stop people discussing topics they are enthusiastic about, but we do ask users to find ways of sharing their views that do not feel divisive, threatening or toxic to others.

5. We will not tolerate racism, sexism, homophobia or other forms of hate-speech, or contributions that could be interpreted as such. We recognise the difference between criticising a particular government, organisation, community or belief and attacking people on the basis of their race, religion, sex, gender, sexual orientation, disability or age.

6. We will remove any content that may put us in legal jeopardy, such as potentially libellous or defamatory postings, or material posted in potential breach of copyright.

7. We will remove any posts that are obviously commercial or otherwise spam-like. Our aim is that this site should provide a space for people to interact with our content and each other, and we actively discourage commercial entities passing themselves off as individuals, in order to post advertising material or links. This may also apply to people or organisations who frequently post propaganda or external links without adding substantively to the quality of the discussion on the Guardian website.

8. Keep it relevant. We know that some conversations can be wide-ranging, but if you post something which is unrelated to the original topic ("off-topic") then it may be removed, in order to keep the thread on track. This also applies to queries or comments about moderation, which should not be posted as comments.

9. Be aware that you may be misunderstood, so try to be clear about what you are saying, and expect that people may understand your contribution differently than you intended. Remember that text isn't always a great medium for conversation: tone of voice (sarcasm, humour and so on) doesn't always come across when using words on a screen. You can help to keep the Guardian community areas open to all viewpoints by maintaining a reasonable tone, even in unreasonable circumstances.

10. The platform is ours, but the conversation belongs to everybody.We want this to be a welcoming space for intelligent discussion, and we expect participants to help us achieve this by notifying us of potential problems and helping each other to keep conversations inviting and appropriate. If you spot something problematic in community interaction areas, please report it. When we all take responsibility for maintaining an appropriate and constructive environment, the debate itself is improved and everyone benefits.







Comments

  1. I agree, some people have taken things too far. No need to attack others.

    Hmm, I am interested in those new articles upcoming.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

More thoughts on US gymnastics, Karolyi - and Zaglada

I’d like to add some thoughts to my earlier post about USA gymnastics and Bela Karolyi:  1. What Bela did, he did. He would agree that his actions were his responsibility. 2. Abusive relationships in USA gymnastics (and no doubt elsewhere) pre-existed Bela’s move to the USA and still exist today. 3. Harsh training existed and exists in all of the ‘artistic’ sports and dance-related forms - eg ballroom dancing, ballet, ice skating, circus.  The training involved in most of these activities is founded on an assumption of the benefits of early specialisation.  It revolves around  ‘ideal’ forms, shapes and postures that are difficult to achieve without early years training - women especially.   4. Wherever prodigious early talent exists, there are predators whose main desire in life is to take advantage of that talent - music, entertainment, maths, sport.  The boundaries very easily become confused.  Who owns the talent?  Who decides how many hours to work, at what level?  FOR WHOSE BENEFI

Britain 1, Russia 2 in Junior European Gymnastics Championships

Sergei Eltcov, Kirill Potapov, Artur Dalolyan, Nikita Nagorny, Valentin Starikov It was a close-ish competition, but Britain came out on top everywhere as a team, except for pommel horse where the British had a bad day, and rings, a strong piece for a Russia.  In truth, they are two brilliant teams.  Many of these gymnasts will turn senior next year, swelling the ranks of their respective teams.  I can't wait to see them fight for medals at the a Rio Olympics.  Coached by two Russians (Andrei Popov and Sergei Sizhanov from the historic gymnastics city of a Vladimir), the British team carries the classical mark of the Russian school. CORRECTION - The British Junior team head coach is now Barry Collie.  

Tutkhalyan, Bondareva will fight to compete at Youth Olympics

Olga Bulgakova, courtesy of RGF Key points of a short interview with Olga Bulgakova, Head Coach of the national junior team http://www.allsportinfo.ru/index.php?id=83100 They had expected a little better result on floor and vault.  They need to review and change their tactics, work on the mistakes.  Bars and beam were the most successful pieces. The girls reached their minimum targets.  They use the results of competition for analysis, to understand where things aren't working, and correct any weaknesses. Seda Tutkhalyan and Maria Bondareva will be considered for the Youth Olympics in Nanjing.  Seda's programme is more complex.  But this was a major competition for both girls and both had errors.  There is still some work to do. Seda has complex routines, dealing with them is very hard.  If her routines had been less difficult of course that would have been easier to handle and she would be more stable.  But that wouldn't offer much promise.  She has a very promising progra

RRG Archive - scroll by date, from 2024 to 2010

Show more