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

GuanYin

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

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'.

The season we run from is from July to July, when the charter took effect.

You have two red card infractions (worth two yellow each) and 4 yellow card infractions, totalling 6.

You were notified by e-mail of every one with a message explaining the infraction and the mail was copied and is viewable for all smods and the sports cmod to see so there is a public tracking record of this.

I can produce the details of your offence and the time, date and mail sent to you if you wish. In cases where you responded, I can also publish your pm response to infractions.

Just ask and I will do so.

OhNoYouDidn't

GuanYin wrote: »

The season we run from is from July to July, when the charter took effect.

You have two red card infractions (worth two yellow each) and 4 yellow card infractions, totalling 6.

You were notified by e-mail of every one with a message explaining the infraction and the mail was copied and is viewable for all smods and the sports cmod to see so there is a public tracking record of this.

I can produce the details of your offence and the time, date and mail sent to you if you wish. In cases where you responded, I can also publish your pm response to infractions.

Just ask and I will do so.

Two red cards and 4 yellow cards since July? Please do show me these details.

While doing so you can take a look at PHB not 'giving a crap' about the racist, sorry, xenephobic one.

Or you can stop trying to bully me. Your call.

jaykay74

GuanYin wrote: »

You have two red card infractions (worth two yellow each) and 4 yellow card infractions, totalling 6.

(2x2)+4=8

GuanYin

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Two red cards and 4 yellow cards since July? Please do show me these details.

Sorry, my bad, 2 red cards and 2 yellow cards since July which equals 6 yellow cards.

There were two yellow card infractions in that McCarthy thread, but I didn't issue them as you'd already surpassed the season limit.

Infraction 1 - red card (two yellows) - TOTAL 2

OhNoYouDidn't on 18-07-2008, 15:47 wrote:

there just has to be a murderpool player in there, doesnt there. Regardless of whether he was a bargain or any good.

red card for intentional trolling

Infraction 2- yellow card (one yellow) - TOTAL 3

OhNoYouDidn't on 04-08-2008, 17:17 wrote:

And with that, the entire Irish forced emigration of the 19th century just brushed over. If they had half a chance they wouldn't have needed to go to Scotland.

Idiot.

yellow card for mild abuse

Infraction 3- redcard (two yellows) - TOTAL 5

OhNoYouDidn't on 08-09-2008, 16:22 wrote:

Have you anything to back that thesis up?

And if you are going to quote me on your sig, try taking the whole quote.

Liverpool FC = murderers. 27 convictions.

red card for repeat offence of intentional trolling

Infraction 4- yellow card (one yellow) - TOTAL 6

OhNoYouDidn't on 05-11-2008, 16:08 wrote:

Reading the Manure fans on here reminds me why I avoid the Engerlish football threads on here like the plague.

yellow card for mild trolling

Soccer Forum Charter wrote:

Those receiving three red card infractions (be they through straight red or multiple yellow cards) will be banned from the forum for the entire season (running July-July) or 6 months, which ever is longer.

OhNoYouDidn't

GuanYin wrote: »

Sorry, my bad, 2 red cards and 2 yellow cards since July which equals 6 yellow cards.

There were two yellow card infractions in that McCarthy thread, but I didn't issue them as you'd already surpassed the season limit.

Infraction 1 - red card (two yellows) - TOTAL 2


Infraction 2- yellow card (one yellow) - TOTAL 3


Infraction 3- redcard (two yellows) - TOTAL 5


Infraction 4- yellow card (one yellow) - TOTAL 6

So thats 4 infractions. Not the 8 you started out with? You said you would put up 8 emails from the mods? Now we are down to 4?

But congratulations. You managed to ban me for 6 months pointing out a number of users are unhappy with the moderation. And without any sense of irony. Good work.

GuanYin

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

So thats 4 infractions. Not the 8 you started out with?

No I started out with 6 separate infraction, but I didn't give two of the infractions (which I did erroneously include in my calculation)so it is 4 separate infractions that is 6 yellow cards instead of 8 which I subsequently calculated, but never stated..
Either way, you're over the limit.
It looks to me like you've never actually read the soccer forum charter.

But congratulations. You managed to ban me for 6 months pointing out a number of users are unhappy with the moderation. And without any sense of irony. Good work.

No, you got yourself banned because you don't follow the rules, it just happens that we missed the extent of this.

You and you alone are responsible for every single one of your posts and your posts got you banned.

I don't think anyone could argue with your record.

Also, I addressed the issue raised in this thread by reviewing the moderation, so I don't know how you can complain that that issue wasn't addressed either.

The irony is, that you went calling about other people's behavior when you are the worst offender in the soccer forum (by virtue of the fact you are the first and only so far, to clock up 6 yellow cards).

OhNoYouDidn't

Fair play GY, you laid down the benchmark there.

If anyone is going to ask arkward questions about the bias on here, you will contrive a way to ban them.

I'm in awe of your internet power. Trembling behind my machine at your wrath.

Edit - just saw your 'irony' comment. Breathtaking.

GuanYin

Your attempts to troll aside, I find it amusing that you seem to want to blame this situation on other people when you are the sole person responsible. If anyone was to fall foul of petty wrath, you'd think it would be Des or Bobbysands, but they didn't because 1) they haven't earned a ban and 2) I don't work like that.

The fact it was notice now is really beside the issue, it would have been noticed the next time you were infracted or banned.

Don't do the crime if you won't do the time, as they say.

I'm sure you'll just try play victim again which, while amusing to me, grows tiresome quickly.

The soccer forum is better off without you tbh.

OhNoYouDidn't

GuanYin wrote: »

Your attempts to troll aside, I find it amusing that you seem to want to blame this situation on other people when you are the sole person responsible. If anyone was to fall foul of petty wrath, you'd think it would be Des or Bobbysands, but they didn't because 1) they haven't earned a ban and 2) I don't work like that.

The fact it was notice now is really beside the issue, it would have been noticed the next time you were infracted or banned.

Don't do the crime if you won't do the time, as they say.

I'm sure you'll just try play victim again which, while amusing to me, grows tiresome quickly.

The soccer forum is better off without you tbh.

No-one is playing victim.

I'm just saying is somewhat incredilious that you managed to 'find' a clerical error on my account, one that all the other mods just happened to miss, when I agree with a fellow poster that moderation on this site is erratic. To prove me wrong, you ban me for six months. I could kick up a fuss that I have actually only recieved 4 infractions, but its not really the point.

This is a petty, vindictive, misuse of your power.

But life goes on. I have had a number of PM's of support and it says a great deal about the environment that you have created that no-one is willing to publically defend me. If thats how you want to run the site, well you can keep it. A load of teenage EPL fans agreeing with each other for fear of censure. Fascinating.

GuanYin

Well lets put your PMs of support to the test.

If anyone can give me a reason why the 6 month ban on ONYD isn't valid, please post your reasoning and if deemed fair by the CMOD and myself, I'll unban ONYD.

If you don't get one, you always have helpdesk to contest.

OhNoYouDidn't

GuanYin wrote: »

Well lets put your PMs of support to the test.

If anyone can give me a reason why the 6 month ban on ONYD isn't valid, please post your reasoning and if deemed fair by the CMOD and myself, I'll unban ONYD.

If you don't get one, you always have helpdesk to contest.

So despite the glee you took in banning me for daring to support someone, you expect them to publically appeal your decision to you? :rolleyes:

A comedian as well as a bully.

I'm you could argue that my ban is technically valid, my point is why you decided I deserved the severe audit treatment and why the same hasn't been applied to other users?

I repeat, this is a petty, vindictive abuse of your power.

GuanYin

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

So despite the glee you took in banning me for daring to support someone, you expect them to publically appeal your decision to you? :rolleyes:

A comedian as well as a bully.

You were banned for your posts on soccer no other reason. As I said, it would have been noticed eventually, you just drew my attention to it now.

Any user can make a point here and will receive no fallout in soccer, behavior in feedback does not count in soccer.

I'm you could argue that my ban is technically valid, my point is why you decided I deserved the severe audit treatment and why the same hasn't been applied to other users?

You know you deserve your ban, you'r ejust pissed you got caught and are trying to deflect, I'm just amused by this, I get no enjoyment.

I actually did a search on other users, to see if anyone else had 6 yellows.

Only you so far.


So yeah, I'll check back in a while to see all those people who PMd you support telling me how your ban isn't valid.... *holds breath*

Gandalf23

This is from this thread. Prophetic or what.

Ponster wrote: »

1. A certain % of members will be unlikely to speak up in feedback pre-ban as they believe that doing so will single them out in the future and lead to a banning.

GuanYin wrote: »

Any user can make a point here and will receive no fallout in soccer, behavior in feedback does not count in soccer.

Really?

Then what about this thread where you state "I originally stated the minute the OTT thread got a feedback complaint, it would be closed."

There seems to be a contradiction there somewhere.



Look GY, I respect the work you are doing and the establishment of the Research forum. But the way you are acting here looks very bad imho. The perception is that OhNoYouDidn't is being banned for challenging you, and even tho the ban might be technically correct it looks petty and vindictive

Surely you are bigger than this?

GuanYin

Gandalf23 wrote: »

This is from this thread. Prophetic or what.

If that were the case, there would be many, many people banned from soccer.

Really?

Then what about this thread where you state "I originally stated the minute the OTT thread got a feedback complaint, it would be closed."

No user was banned and that was clearly outlined in the thread.

Look GY, I respect the work you are doing and the establishment of the Research forum. But the way you are acting here looks very bad imho. The perception is that OhNoYouDidn't is being banned for challenging you, and even tho the ban might be technically correct it looks petty and vindictive

Surely you are bigger than this?

If you perceive that, it is your business.

Do you agree that by the rules of the soccer forum, ONYD should be banned? You appear to.

Am I supposed to not ban someone who deserves it because they might make a case that they think they shouldn't be banned or that I'm biased?

Thats pretty much every ban any mod gives.

Gandalf23

GuanYin wrote: »

No user was banned and that was clearly outlined in the thread.

Accepted, but that is not the point.

You said,

GuanYin wrote: »

Any user can make a point here and will receive no fallout in soccer, behavior in feedback does not count in soccer.

... but in the other thread you stated ...

GuanYin wrote: »

I originally stated the minute the OTT thread got a feedback complaint, it would be closed.

Are you now denying those quotes? They seem very clear to me.

So there was clearly "fallout" in soccer because of a feedback thread ... i.e. the OTT thread being closed.

Behaviour in feedback most definitely counts in soccer.

The point being that feedback threads on soccer (and you as a soccer mod) seem to have (mostly negative) repercussions. This thread has lead to ONYD being retrospectively banned because he brought attention onto himself by challenging you, and the other thread led directly to the closure of the OTT thread in soccer.

So there seems to be lots of "fallout" when posters take soccer (and you) to feedback.

As I said above, I have no stake in this ... I'm just giving honest feedback. I'm a soccer forum lurker (I have access but I've never posted there btw).

But the retrospective banning of ONYD looks bad, vindictive and petty tbh.

I dont have any more to say about this ... people will make up their own minds I suppose.

Gandalf23

GuanYin wrote: »

Do you agree that by the rules of the soccer forum, ONYD should be banned? You appear to.

One last quick thing because of your edit.

I never said anywhere that ONYD should or should not be banned.

I said the banning looked petty, vindictive and bad.

If you perceive something I didnt say, that is your business.

GuanYin

you said the ban "might be technically correct " and it is.

ONYD would have been noticed and banned, I was asked to review a thread and I did, it happens that the poster asking broke the rules and earned a ban.

That isn't my fault. If the poster had not broken the rules, I would have no reason to ban him. Very simple.

Regarding the OTT thread, I'll accept that is the exception to the rule, however, considering the rules on that was laid down far in advance and very clearly and was accepted at the time, again that is not a case of me doing anything but following through on the pre established rules. It is a rather pedantic recall though, but hey, if you think it makes a case.

Never and in no way would any poster be punished with a soccer ban for the content of a post in feedback. How is that?

You're making it out that I do these things on a whim, which is not the case.

Now, unless you can see a reason that ONYD doesn't deserve the ban, I think we're done. Next.

Villain

How about this thread gets closed and while the LOI is on off-season the LOI fans watch some quality Premier League football

GuanYin

Villain wrote: »

How about this thread gets closed and while the LOI is on off-season the LOI fans watch some quality Premier League football

Banned from Soccer for trolling!

stovelid

GuanYin wrote: »

Now, unless you can see a reason that ONYD doesn't deserve the ban, I think we're done. Next.

I don't think the point is about the validity, Guan Yin, it's the bad timing and utterly stinking, petty way that it looks. Especially to non-soccer users.

Surely there is a better way to resolve this?

PHB

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Even if thats what you said (and its not, I have the Pm)

Des wrote: »

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....

Come on OhNoYouDidn't, post the pm. I have the PM's here, but I'd much rather you post them and maybe you could put in bold where I said that.

jaykay74

PHB wrote: »

Come on OhNoYouDidn't, post the pm. I have the PM's here, but I'd much rather you post them and maybe you could put in bold where I said that.

I must say with a username like OhNoYouDidn't and all this cloak'n'dagger stuff its all got a touch of panto about it. OhYesHeDid....

stovelid

Villain wrote: »

How about this thread gets closed and while the LOI is on off-season the LOI fans watch some quality Premier League football

I take it you didn't watch the United match tonight, Villain?

GuanYin

stovelid wrote: »

I don't think the point is about the validity, Guan Yin, it's the bad timing and utterly stinking, petty way that it looks. Especially to non-soccer users.

Surely there is a better way to resolve this?

Well I can add a further ban when his season long ban is up to account for the time he should have been banned from the forum but wasn't.

Does that sound fair?

jaykay74

GuanYin wrote: »

Well I can add a further ban when his season long ban is up to account for the time he should have been banned from the forum but wasn't.

Does that sound fair?

Not really. tbh it doesn't come across well at all. I can buy into the idea of the ban but your last post just seems petty, unnatural in terms of punishment (since the mistake in not banning is a mod issue) and rightly or wrongly smacks of the famous quote by R. Keane about Haaland in his book about THAT tackle.

Thats just my opinion though, may not be shared by all or any...

Maybe instead since the extended ban was missed by the mods that since a certain period of time has elapsed the crime should have expired. (I don't know how long it was missed for by the mods, 1 week, 1 month, 4 months, 2 seasons.... ??)

stovelid

GuanYin wrote: »

Well I can add a further ban when his season long ban is up to account for the time he should have been banned from the forum but wasn't.

Does that sound fair?

Are you threatening - even in a jocular way - to increase bans in proportion with any perceived criticism of yourself?

GuanYin

jaykay74 wrote: »

Not really. tbh it doesn't come across well at all.

stovelid wrote: »

Are you threatening - even in a jocular way - to increase bans in proportion with any perceived criticism of yourself?

Oh dear. I wasn't in any way serious. I was making the point that although the timing may indeed suck, the poster still posted freely in a forum for several days when they should have been banned. This, however, was entirely our fault and the poster shouldn't suffer.

That said, they've been posting long enough when they shouldn't be and of course they would be banned the second the mistake was realized. The idea of allowing them amnesty just because of the timing is equally as ludicrous.

jaykay74

GuanYin wrote: »

The idea of allowing them amnesty just because of the timing is equally as ludicrous.

Well there must be some expiration point. Otherwise (humour hat on here please), if some deranged crazed mod decided to get you and went back digging though your posts and finds some misdemeanor from 5 years back and uses that to enforce a ban that wouldn't seem right.. Anyway kid crying upstairs best of luck with all that...

GuanYin

jaykay74 wrote: »

Well there must be some expiration point. Otherwise (humour hat on here please), if some deranged crazed mod decided to get you and went back digging though your posts and finds some misdemeanor from 5 years back and uses that to enforce a ban that wouldn't seem right.. Anyway kid crying upstairs best of luck with all that...

It depends on the issue, but there is a difference between a single incident and the policy in the soccer forum which isn't down to a single incident but cumulative incidents and which do indeed expire on yearly basis.

OhNoYouDidn't

GuanYin wrote: »

So yeah, I'll check back in a while to see all those people who PMd you support telling me how your ban isn't valid.... *holds breath*

How is that working out for you? :rolleyes:

Genuine question. Are you unaware how petty you look or do you simply not care?