Should it be okay to be allowed make unsubstantiated accusations against another team

therecklessone

Steven wrote: »

You guys are probably confusing "Warcraft" with "World of Warcraft". Just thought I'd point that out.

... I'll be going then.

Hello, i`m Maximus. I want to share about how to play Rexxar-The Beasmaster. Rexxar is a great support hero with his ulti is so great I want to help DS reader to play Rexxar properly. Ganking here with necronomicon and roar is my focus. Thank you guys for reading my guide.
Go to Top

GuanYin

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Finally, the lies on the James McCarthy thread are a disgrace to this Board, that they haven't been dealt with makes it all the more disgraceful. Shame on the Mods.

Lies or ill founded opinions?

As I said before, we can't stamp out opinions that are unpopular, just those that are abusive or break the rules.

If you don't like an opinion, argue it.

I would bet my modship that the minute we start censuring opinions, we'll have a feedback thread on censorship tellings us we should be ashamed.

We're well aware we cannot win, but we can expect a small modicum of reason from the users.

stovelid wrote: »

Des is quoting me here. In that particular thread, I got really annoyed because LOI threads often invite off-topic comments. The one in that thread is a classic example. Somebody is basically ridiculing the fact that Irish football fans feel that Irish players should be considered for the Irish national team.

At other times, you get (no doubt) well intentioned, but off-topic comments in LOI threads about why teams should be merged; the league should be wound up; why it is sub-standard. Not exactly trolling, but off-topic unless the immediate subject at hand is about these issues.

I'll call you on this.

While I agree this does happen, I'll also point out that LoI fans are not above entering a thread and turning it into an EPL vs. LoI thread. I'll name the Sunderland thread and any number of Irish international threads on this.
Des has been a chief offender on this in the past (I can pick a thread where I publicly mention this and he responds).

It isn't about one set of users being picked on, or some team being "fair game" it is simply a trend in discussion that happens in many threads.

The big difference is that although LoI fans seem happy to engage and disrupt non-LoI threads, they seem very unhappy when the debate is taken to them.

What would you have us do?

Maybe I should ban all LoI vs. EPL comparison/discussion or would you prefer it was only banned in LoI threads? I can do that too, but to offset, I'll perm ban any LoI fan who takes it to an EPL/National thread.

Posters either learn responsibility and restraint or we'll enforce dictorial rules. We're all adults and we shouldn't have people coming crying to nanny like this.

_blank_

A discussion forum is about discussion. Now, I'm not saying that people shouldn't post opinions. But, I've said this already, and it hasn't been addressed

People come into the LoI and Celtic threads, post wild claims, and then disappear without backing them up. Just. To. Cause. A. Shítstorm.

When I post my opinions, I'll back them up when questioned. People may not agree, but so be it. At least I try to explain them.

People coming and dropping "bombs" like "The LoI should be disbanded" - knowing it's going to piss people off, and then not bothering to post proper well reasoned discussions is ridiculous. It's purely aimed to rile people up, nothing more. It's even more frustrating when they ignore questioning and keep posting stuff that is aimed at getting a rise.

That isn't on.

As soon as someone does it in the Liverpool/Manchester superthreads, they are immediately hit with the banhammer/infraction stick.

It's unfair and inconsistant.

Also, again I'll question the mods. Why was my original PM ignored until a CMod was involved?

tbh

Des wrote: »

A discussion forum is about discussion. Now, I'm not saying that people shouldn't post opinions. But, I've said this already, and it hasn't been addressed

People come into the LoI and Celtic threads, post wild claims, and then disappear without backing them up. Just. To. Cause. A. Shítstorm.

When I post my opinions, I'll back them up when questioned. People may not agree, but so be it. At least I try to explain them.

People coming and dropping "bombs" like "The LoI should be disbanded" - knowing it's going to piss people off, and then not bothering to post proper well reasoned discussions is ridiculous. It's purely aimed to rile people up, nothing more. It's even more frustrating when they ignore questioning and keep posting stuff that is aimed at getting a rise.

That isn't on.

As soon as someone does it in the Liverpool/Manchester superthreads, they are immediately hit with the banhammer/infraction stick.

It's unfair and inconsistant.

Also, again I'll question the mods. Why was my original PM ignored until a CMod was involved?

dude, seriously, if you know someone is posting to cause a ****storm, would you not be better off ignoring them? It takes two to ****storm - one to ****, the other to storm. Break the chain, I beg you

GuanYin

Des wrote: »

A discussion forum is about discussion. Now, I'm not saying that people shouldn't post opinions. But, I've said this already, and it hasn't been addressed

People come into the LoI and Celtic threads, post wild claims, and then disappear without backing them up. Just. To. Cause. A. Shítstorm.

When I post my opinions, I'll back them up when questioned. People may not agree, but so be it. At least I try to explain them.

Maybe, but while you think an explanation is enough, from our point of view, by the time it gets that far, the sh*tstorm has already happened.

What you're saying is (when you're not at first denying your involvement), it is ok if you do something because you think your way is right.

We (the mods) disagree. I'm not sure what else there is to discuss.

Also, again I'll question the mods. Why was my original PM ignored until a CMod was involved?

I was under the impression this was explained to you but:

1. We were discussing the issue"s"
2. We initiated our discussion shortly after your PM.
3. We had involved the CMOD in the discussion.
4. ergo your PM was not ignored.
5. We're not in the habit of being forced into responding to or acting on issues until we have majority/consensus, no matter how much this may displease you.

_blank_

GuanYin wrote: »

What you're saying is (when you're not at first denying your involvement), it is ok if you do something because you think your way is right.

No, I'm not saying that at all.

Nobody's opinion is the right one, or the wrong one. I'm not that arrogant, strange as it may seem.

But.

It's easier to take a well reasoned opinion, with a person outlining why they hold it, rather than just blurting a fairly radical opinion without saying why they think it. And most of the time, legging it and not coming back when questioned on it. That is more infuriating that someone with a radical opinion, but who can back it up with reasons.

I said I hoped Germany would hammer Ireland. Yes I did. And I gave my reasons too. So your example was out of context to this argument.

GuanYin wrote: »

We (the mods) disagree. I'm not sure what else there is to discuss.

Well, the mod actions would jar with this.

GuanYin

Des wrote: »

It's easier to take a well reasoned opinion, with a person outlining why they hold it, rather than just blurting a fairly radical opinion without saying why they think it. And most of the time, legging it and not coming back when questioned on it. That is more infuriating that someone with a radical opinion, but who can back it up with reasons.

If I banned everyone from soccer who didn't or couldn't put together a rational debate abd back up their points, we *MIGHT* have about 20 posters on the forum.

We can't make people be sensible. We can put guidelines in and hope people follow them. We're not the thought police though.

We cannot enforce a rule where posters must give a reason for their opinion, you can ask them to explain and maybe if the refuse report the post if you feel they're trolling (as opposed to just disagreeing with them) report the post. We'll make the call then.

I said I hoped Germany would hammer Ireland. Yes I did. And I gave my reasons too. So your example was out of context to this argument.

I don't know about that. Some might suggest your reason was insufficient or was a poor reason. Do we have to start judging standards of the reasoning or will any reason do?

For instance, if someone said "Team X are crap and I hope they're relegated because I saw them once and they were terrible and bored me" would that not be an opinion and a reason?

Does it really add anything more than "I think team X are crap"

People in life will disagree with you, they will say and do things you don't like. It doesn't make them bad people. You'll just have to get over it.

20 Times 20 Times

I must be the only LOI fan that couldnt care less what other people/fans say about the league.You support who you want , I'll do likewise.

Have a nice day guys.

OhNoYouDidn't

PHB wrote: »

Oh I forgot to respond to this crap. I didn't say I didn't care if the post was racist, I said I couldn't give a **** if somebody else thought it was racist. But lets not let the truth get in the way of a good story.

Even if thats what you said (and its not, I have the Pm) its still entirely unnacceptable for a mod to respond to a complaint, and I know I was not the only person who complained about it, by saying 'you couldn't give a crap'. Doubly unnaceptible when the complaint was that the post was racist. You are arguing semantics to avoid the bigger issue - that post would not have stood if made against Liverpool or Man Utd. How long would posts mocking Hillboro or Munich last?

The in question song is banned by the SFA and FIFA. Its also illegal according to the Scottish Police and courts. But posting the lyrics here is 'an opinion', while sayng ManUre is a two week ban. In your own time gents.....

I also find entertaining that a number of posters citing the same bias are told they are wrong. Are we getting to the nub of the problem yet?

_blank_

Post the PM.

If he's telling the truth, and you are lying, you'll be made look a fool.

If he is telling lies, and you are telling the truth, well then....

OhNoYouDidn't

GuanYin wrote: »

As I said before, we can't stamp out opinions that are unpopular, just those that are abusive or break the rules.

If you don't like an opinion, argue it.
.

And what happens if you argue with them and they either ignore you or post gibberish, which is what happened here? Benedict was given every opportunity to back his 'opinion' up and refused, then the complaints were made.

Calling a Celtic fan a bigot is exceptionally close to the bone, and to then refuse back up an outlandish opinion is trolling. Ditto the same suspects on the LoI thread But thats incedental to the pont here.

That is that fans of the EPL are wrapped in cotton wool while Celtic fans are told that racist posts are 'opinions'. Why is talking about Heysel a bannable offence but the sectarianism the Irish diaspora have to deal with allowed to be repeated on here? All we are asking is that the very evident bias be addresed one way or the other. Not that unpopular opinions be stifled.

_blank_

But.

Those who are being biased keep saying that they aren't.

They obviously can't see that they are being biased, and are taking it as a personal affront that someone would even contemplate saying that about them.

This is nothing personal mods, but it is a fact.

Even if you refuse to see it, and circle the wagons, again.

A bias DOES exist, quite simply because the mods don't care enough about certain aspects of the topics being discussed.

They can't see why upset would be caused, and don't care either.

That is the nub of the problem, but until the mods accept that there even might be a problem, then we'll just have to trundle along until it all blows up again. And it will. I've no doubt about that.

The mods currently in place don't care about the topics that there are problems with. And because they don't care, they certainly can't understand why there is a problem, so to them, there is no problem.

They can't see the wood for the trees.

Also, I can't believe Celtic and LoI fans are fighhting the same corner.

Bizarre.

GuanYin

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

And what happens if you argue with them and they either ignore you or post gibberish, which is what happened here? Benedict was given every opportunity to back his 'opinion' up and refused, then the complaints were made.

This isn't the politics forum we're talking about, it is soccer. Much of soccer is ill-informed rose tinted passion.

I could set up rule stomorrow that would satisfy you but kill that passion and I'd have twice as many feedbackthreads. I don't really care about the feedback threads. We've made our decision, it's really up to you to deal with it.

Calling a Celtic fan a bigot is exceptionally close to the bone, and to then refuse back up an outlandish opinion is trolling. Ditto the same suspects on the LoI thread But thats incedental to the pont here.

If it were one sided I'd call it trolling and act. As it is something that both sides are guilty of, I'm unsure what you think makes you unreproachable compared to others.

That is that fans of the EPL are wrapped in cotton wool while Celtic fans are told that racist posts are 'opinions'. Why is talking about Heysel a bannable offence but the sectarianism the Irish diaspora have to deal with allowed to be repeated on here? All we are asking is that the very evident bias be addresed one way or the other. Not that unpopular opinions be stifled.

Unless catholics and/or celtics fans are a separate race, I don't quite see the racism. It may be biggoted in terms of catholicism or it may be trollish in terms of club support but it is in no way racist (don't even get me started on mis-use of the term racism, it's not a place you want to go).

Recounting a song isn't exactly trolling unless they were intending to aim it at another poster, in much the same way recounting football chants are unlikely to get you banned, even if they are insulting, unless aimed at someone.

We ban on intent, not content. This distinction has been made and largely accepted by the "soft" EPL fans you mention. Perhaps you should learn to distinguish the two.

Mind you, I was away for this incident but I'm sure my co-mods reviewed the situation and didn't view the incident as intent.

Either way, I'll tell you what, next time, PM me directly and I'll see and tell you exactly why I will or won't act on your complaint and the matter will end there.

@Des.
The nub of the problem is certain posters who throw a fit when they have any sort of comment against their views.

This is childish and ridiculous and believe me, I'm not in the mood to tolerate it any more.

We'll mod the forum and I say this with nothing personal attached, if you don't like it, go somewhere else.

When you actually have an example of a complaint where we don't act and should have, I'll return to this issue with you. I've dealt with all your previous reports and despite the fact you claimed to have left the thread, you're still whining (honestly, Mr alan was NEVER this bad) and making snide remarks in feedback threads.

OhNoYouDidn't

So it was a productive racist post because the intent may not have been racist, even if the content was. Right. Thanks for clearing that up.

Now we get a semantic response from you that its not racist? Ok, xenophobic then!?! The post was directed at an individual and is still there.

Who is asking to be unreproachable? We are asking that the rules be uniformley applied and you have been shown a number of examples of how it has not been done so. If the best you can do is tell us to like it or lump it, I'll take that as a vindication of our stance in bringing this up.

Des hit a nail on the head here. You are being told there is a bias and are refusing to accept that. Its human nature, but there have been some appaling mod decisions on the forum recently, enough to cause a stir. If you refuse to deal with it, well its your loss when posters will simply give up and go somewhere they don't have to deal with teenage WUM's on every thread.

GuanYin

Hold on, you regularly call supporters murderers and abuse people in the forum and you have the audacity to turn around and give out about other posters.

I actually just realized something.

I'm going to go back and review two pieces of moderating. The one in question here and another one.

OhNoYouDidn't

GuanYin wrote: »

Hold on, you regularly call supporters murderers and abuse people in the forum and you have the audacity to turn around and give out about other posters.

I actually just realized something.

I'm going to go back and review two pieces of moderating. The one in question here and another one.

On one occasion I called the ones with murder convictions murderers, yes. Its my opinion.....

GuanYin

I've reviewed the thread.

First, I enjoy the calls of biggotry and racism when I see this in a thread

There is nothing sectarian or racist about booing people who play for Rangers.

especially when the term "hun" is used so frequently in the forum.

Some outcomes:

Bastardprince got an infraction for abuse.
Benedict got an infraction for trolling.
bobbysands got an infraction for trolling.
OhNoYouDidn't should have gotten multiple infractions for backseat modding and one comment about liverpool/murderers, but didn't (see below)


I'm leaving it at that. Quite frankly, I have good reason to ban BOTH bobbysands and Benedict for a week or two, but I'll leave both with the infraction and I'll take on board the suggestion to monitor more closely.

That said, my verdict is, there was trolling on both sides and the thread closure was a good call - if there were bannings, multiple parties would be involved - in fact, benedict, bobbysands and ONYD would all have been banned had I been here when that thread took place..

There have been retroactive infractions and now a retroactive ban.

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

On one occasion I called the ones with murder convictions murderers, yes. Its my opinion.....

Two occasions (technically three, but the last was innuendo) you referred to liverpool as murderpool and made a comment about ALL liverpool fans, and it's against the rules. Your comment on others here gave me cause to review your infraction history and you have also received 2 red cards and 4 yellow cards from soccer since the rule change. PHB missed this and you should have been banned for the remainder of the season. Given the amount of instances that you should have been infracted in that thread you are now.

OhNoYouDidn't

So your response to a complaint about the modding on here is to ban the two users who complained? I got 6 months?!? How refreshingly childish of you.

I assume that this is some form of point about mod power and you will lift them later. Otherwise thats the most petty thing I have ever seen. Impressively so.

But you have proved my point. Calling Celtic fans are bigots is an opinion. Stating the fact that Liverpool fans committed murder in Heysel is a banning offence.

GuanYin

No, you got banned for 6 months for receiving multiple infractions as per the charter. None of the infractions that contributed to your 6 month ban were in that thread.

Go read the soccer forum charter then look at your infraction record and explain to me why you don't think you should get a 6 month ban?

Bobbysands was not banned, merely infracted.

I was asked to be even and I reviewed the thread and I was.

I'm not sure what your complaint is.

_blank_

I have a question.

I don't have an "infraction record" - it's impossible for me to have.

How does the whole red/yellow card system relate to me, and other mods who post in Soccer.

I have never been notified of any "infractionable" instances, but have been issued with two bans, since the new rules, iirc.

Thanks.

OhNoYouDidn't

GuanYin wrote: »

No, you got banned for 6 months for receiving multiple infractions as per the charter. None of the infractions that contributed to your 6 month ban were in that thread.

Go read the soccer forum charter then look at your infraction record and explain to me why you don't think you should get a 6 month ban?

Bobbysands was not banned, merely infracted.

I was asked to be even and I reviewed the thread and I was.

I'm not sure what your complaint is.

You don't think it a bit pedantic to go through my posts, find numerous things that the mods 'missed' and then tot them up to 6 and ban me for 6 months? Would you have gone through my posts if I hadn't complained about the moderation? If not, are you not abusing your power?

You need to step back and think about how this looks.

6th

Des wrote: »

I have a question.

I don't have an "infraction record" - it's impossible for me to have.

How does the whole red/yellow card system relate to me, and other mods who post in Soccer.

I have never been notified of any "infractionable" instances, but have been issued with two bans, since the new rules, iirc.

Thanks.

mods can be infracted by Smods. If you feel you should have some you could ask one of them?

Dub13

We have a thread setup in the Soccer mod forum to keep track of Mods infractions.

Beruthiel

I'm always here to help Des

_blank_

Beruthiel wrote: »

I'm always here to help Des

I'm sure GY will be along presently to request some. :pac:

_blank_

Dub13 wrote: »

We have a thread setup in the Soccer mod forum to keep track of Mods infractions.

And, do I have any?

If so, I was never notified of them.

Thanks.

GuanYin

Yes you do, it was recorded with a ban.

_blank_

GuanYin wrote: »

Yes you do, it was recorded with a ban.

So, what?

2 Red Cards against me, or what?

Could you explain the process a bit more to me please.

It's not in the charter, as far as I can see.

edit.

PM Sent, as per charter.

GuanYin

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

You don't think it a bit pedantic to go through my posts, find numerous things that the mods 'missed' and then tot them up to 6 and ban me for 6 months? Would you have gone through my posts if I hadn't complained about the moderation? If not, are you not abusing your power?

You need to step back and think about how this looks.

That isn't what happened.

I was making a point about the irony of your comment regarding behavior and was looking for your specific "muderers" comment. I then noticed that your last ban should have been for the season. I rectified that.


There was no "decision" or policy change. I merely rectified a clerical error.
If anything, I was lenient in not handing you more infractions.

If any smod thinks it looks bad, please let me know.

OhNoYouDidn't

GuanYin wrote: »

That isn't what happened.

I was making a point about the irony of your comment regarding behavior and was looking for your specific "muderers" comment. I then noticed that your last ban should have been for the season. I rectified that.


There was no "decision" or policy change. I merely rectified a clerical error.
If anything, I was lenient in not handing you more infractions.

If any smod thinks it looks bad, please let me know.

Aside from the fact the season finished on Sunday, I have not received 6 infractions, nor even close to it. Or at least I have not been notifed of them. Exceptionally convienient that you found this 'clerical error'.

But again, why is my murderpool comment, one that is technically accurate, not deemed an opinion, but telling Celtic fans that 'the famine is over, why don't you go home' is? Or calling most Celtic fans bigots?