The Rules

cpunk

LE
Moderator
#1
Here we are then, a dedicated forum for questions about AOSB, regimental selection boards, familiarisation visits, Sandhurst, interview technique, how much to bribe your ACA and so on. It would be nice if the old salts would spend some time giving potential officers the benefit of their vast experience.

The rules are as for the main officers' board, with the two following additions:

1. Try to remain calm in the face of naive and spacky questions: that's what this forum is all about.

2. Try not to post if you don't actually know the answer or part of it. Tips on passing AOSB from people who haven't passed AOSB are worse than useless; tips on Sandhurst from people who haven't been there ditto.

Now crack on.
 

cpunk

LE
Moderator
#2
New rule:

For the avoidance of doubt, banter is fine; egging potential officers - particularly women - on to post photos of themselves or do otherwise silly things is not. There is plenty of room elsewhere on the site for all that kind of stuff.
 

cpunk

LE
Moderator
#3
... and some advice:

Avoid using your real name when posting. These threads are read by members of AOSB boards and they may well be on the lookout for Tarquin Cholmondeley-Featherstonhaugh, Kevin Bloggs or Joan Hunter-Dunn as they pass through Westbury after asking particularly egregious questions here. Make any arrangements to meet by PM.

Please use the search function to ascertain whether your question has been asked before; it almost certainly has.
 

cpunk

LE
Moderator
#5
A final warning: in this part of Arrse we are trying to encourage and help young people who are considering a career as an officer in the British Army. It is quite natural that some of the questions that are asked here will be somewhat naive. Stop and think before you come back with your well-honed put-down or smartarse sneer: what were you like at a similar stage in your career path? Would you have joined if your enquiries had been met by jeers and cyber bullying? If you aren't offering sensible advice or opinions, then don't post.

Future offenders will be ROP'd or banned.
 
#6
cpunk,

I was involved in last night's debacle, which may well have lost the Army an applicant who, at face value (a place I prefer to start from), was keen and well-qualified. This is the first time I have seen this sticky, simply because I use the site through the window of 'Last 50'.

This means my eye was drawn, from memory, to a thread entitled '23 YO woman looking for...'. Now I'm a reasonably sensible chap, but that thread title attracted others, who chose to act as a slavering pack of onanists for their own entertainment and to the detriment of the Army and the OP.

I've no idea what the answer is, but there appears to be a lacuna between forum policy and access to post on said forum. Please feel free to bin this once you've read it.
 

cpunk

LE
Moderator
#7
cpunk,

I was involved in last night's debacle, which may well have lost the Army an applicant who, at face value (a place I prefer to start from), was keen and well-qualified. This is the first time I have seen this sticky, simply because I use the site through the window of 'Last 50'.

This means my eye was drawn, from memory, to a thread entitled '23 YO woman looking for...'. Now I'm a reasonably sensible chap, but that thread title attracted others, who chose to act as a slavering pack of onanists for their own entertainment and to the detriment of the Army and the OP.

I've no idea what the answer is, but there appears to be a lacuna between forum policy and access to post on said forum. Please feel free to bin this once you've read it.
No problems. As it happens I was working this weekend so didn't see the thread until I got home, at which point I issued a warning and got on with life. As you say, the behaviour exhibited yesterday by a few onanistic grandstanders may have lost the army a potential officer which, as I work within RMAS Group, I find personally highly annoying, but which may also alter the benevolent tolerance that the CofC has for Arrse.
 
#8
There's been enough warnings and threads about moderating the site for everyone to know that crayoning in the serious bit is frowned upon. The two that got ROP'd last night have been pulled up countless times.

Can't we just start nuking accounts until the tubes start to wise up a bit?
 
#9
Would it be instructive to have a 'rogues gallery' for offenders, their offending post and their sentence to be displayed for the elucidation of the general population? Obviously offences such as potential libel would have to be spelled out rather than repeated and I suppose it would also be counter-productive to repeat offensive posts in a non-offensive part of the site. So it would either make heavy use of asterisks or could be made an adjunct of the NAAFI.
 

jarrod248

LE
Gallery Guru
#10
There's been enough warnings and threads about moderating the site for everyone to know that crayoning in the serious bit is frowned upon. The two that got ROP'd last night have been pulled up countless times.

Can't we just start nuking accounts until the tubes start to wise up a bit?
I think that's fair, some of us get carried away occasionally but often it's the usual suspects.
I'm sure moderators take into account the odd post that's near the knuckle, when its the usual losers well that's perhaps another story.
 
#11
I think that's fair, some of us get carried away occasionally but often it's the usual suspects.
I'm sure moderators take into account the odd post that's near the knuckle, when its the usual losers well that's perhaps another story.
Interesting question (I'm home alone for a couple of days, so nothing better to do). How does a vaguely military site enforce vaguely military standards and yet give free rein in the NAAFI, which is a crucial safety valve, so long as the crap is hosed out by the morning (before the ten miler)?
 

jarrod248

LE
Gallery Guru
#12
Interesting question (I'm home alone for a couple of days, so nothing better to do). How does a vaguely military site enforce vaguely military standards and yet give free rein in the NAAFI, which is a crucial safety valve, so long as the crap is hosed out by the morning (before the ten miler)?
I don't think it's anything to do with military standards its just about standards and idiots.
 
#13
I don't think it's anything to do with military standards its just about standards and idiots.
I agree with your general idea entirely. I feel the military aspect is to allow a certain (large) latitude in the NAAFI that civvies are not likely to understand and nor would I want them to to. The difficulty for the site is to separate one from t'other. After all, in the real world, the NAAFI is restricted both in terms of time, space and access. Here it is a free for all without restriction on entry or expression without control, which tends to spill out into the more serious bits.
 
#15
I think there is a fundemental misunderstanding amongst some on this site that rops issued on ARRSE actually mean something or pose as a a deterent / punishment. The same applies to banning a user; noboddy cares because, essentialy, none of it really matters or has any real consequence (ie. making an avatar disappear for a few days).

Moderators giving phase one-esque bollockings with threats of "rops" need to understand that they are not taken seriously becasue the threats they are making are insignificant / not actualy real despite how these interent bollockings are delivered.
 
#16
I think there is a fundemental misunderstanding amongst some on this site that rops issued on ARRSE actually mean something or pose as a a deterent / punishment. The same applies to banning a user; noboddy cares because, essentialy, none of it really matters or has any real consequence (ie. making an avatar disappear for a few days).

Moderators giving phase one-esque bollockings with threats of "rops" need to understand that they are not taken seriously becasue the threats they are making are insignificant / not actualy real despite how these interent bollockings are delivered.
You may not take them seriously but you'd be surprised at the level of umbrage some take at being on the receiving end, some proper dummy-spitting episodes I promise you. So no; you're wrong, for some it means the end of the world and they take it very personally.
 

jarrod248

LE
Gallery Guru
#18
Hmm maybe this shouldn't get into ARRSE isn't what it used to be.
I reckon if its a serious part of the thread I add if I know something or want to know something. If its not a serious part I choose whether I'm sensible or not.
 
#19
You may not take them seriously but you'd be surprised at the level of umbrage some take at being on the receiving end, some proper dummy-spitting episodes I promise you. So no; you're wrong, for some it means the end of the world and they take it very personally.
Is there any way to hand them a virtual box of tissues?
 

rampant

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
#20
Would it be instructive to have a 'rogues gallery' for offenders, their offending post and their sentence to be displayed for the elucidation of the general population? Obviously offences such as potential libel would have to be spelled out rather than repeated and I suppose it would also be counter-productive to repeat offensive posts in a non-offensive part of the site. So it would either make heavy use of asterisks or could be made an adjunct of the NAAFI.

We do, it's this thread, http://www.arrse.co.uk/arrse-hole/105655-c0cks-nobbers.html , though tbf, it has somewhat fallen into disuse since being moved to the Arrse Hole, after some exquisite dummy-spitting on the part of some posters, and people have forgotten it. It worked quite well, nominate the chopper in question and the reasons why and if your your nomination gets supported by others they got O2'ed. Worked on Oli_Slick/Semper and Tekirdag amongst others.

So if you feel someone deserves nomination do it.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
G The Intelligence Cell 2
GunnersQuadrant Juniors 55
G The Intelligence Cell 11

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top