Banned from Soccer forum for "thanks"

Spud83

Xavi6 wrote: »

Can I just ask, what happens if a number of posters decide they don't like me down the road? Or Dub13? Should we also be forced to step aside?

Or can we draw up a list of posters we don't respect and ban them for that reason?

Tbh a group of users ganging up to try overthrow a mod is a bit ridiculous and juvenile.

If you want all the mods to be respected then yes. Otherwise mods will have to accept there will be posters that don't like them and will voice that opinion whenever they get a chance ie every feedback thread.

Xavi6

alanmurphy83 wrote: »

If you want all the mods to be respected then yes. Otherwise mods will have to accept there will be posters that don't like them and will voice that opinion whenever they get a chance ie every feedback thread.

So can GY ban all the users she doesn't have respect for?

Villain

Villain wrote: »

But you are not the only mod on the soccer forum is T4FT not a mod, I mean look at http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=58546559#post58546559

He seemed to agree with me yet he's a mod and nothing happened why the hell would I report a post when a mod is seeing the crap agreeing with me but nothung is happening?

Did you see my post Xavi6?

Xavi6

Villain wrote: »

Did you see my post Xavi6?

Yep I have a couple of tabs open so I'm replying to everything as I can.

I have no idea why T4TF did or didn't act in that instance. I'm sure he had his reasons but I can't allude to them.

I still maintain that if you see a post that offends you then report it just to be on the safe side. It takes maybe ten seconds to do it.

Xavi6

Xavi6 wrote: »

Can I just ask, what happens if a number of posters decide they don't like me down the road? Or Dub13? Should we also be forced to step aside?

Like i said previously, yourself, Dub13 and T4TF handle issues in a mature way and don't leave the poster feeling like someone just urinated on them. You treat people like children long enough then they act like it!

Xavi you know damn well how unfriendly GY is to about 90% of the posters on the OTT. She has her craic with you, Al, Des and pfb. Anyone else who tries talking to her generally gets a smarmy remark. I'm not gonna name names but I'm not the only one who finds this. Now is there any reason to be cold and unfriendly in a banter thread? Dub13 and yourself post in that thread all the time and join in the craic, give a ribbing, take a ribbing, it's all good. T4TF posts a bit as well and he's always joining in the banter when he does post. GY on the other hand comes in, has her fun with her favorites and turns her nose up at everyone else. I tried for a while with her using my sense of humour that nobody else had a problem with (except it being crap!!) and got a load of crap back off her about being "creepy". I then changed that and tried just talking civil to her, and got nothing, so to be fair I don't think too many people would support one or 2 posters taking a disliking to any other mods seeing as they treat the posters like adults and talk to them with at least a shred of respect rather than talking to us like we're pieces of dirt that you found on the bottom of your shoe.

Villain

Well I can see what your saying but I have been told off in the past for doing excactly what you say i.e. reporting a post that a mod has replied to on the thread, I think was I told something along the lines "you don't need to report posts mods are replying as its obvious they have seen them and they didn't decide it needed any any action then you reporting it wont make a difference"

Now that was a long time ago but I think it actually makes sense, but how any mod could post in that thread without locking it or at least sorting out some posters seems odd especially given your reaction when you came online?

Spud83

Xavi6 wrote: »

So can GY ban all the users she doesn't have respect for?

Fairly sure it wouldn't be in the charter.

My point is that there is no point bringing 'respect' into it when prob any mod is never going to be respected by every poster. Just like every poster won't be respected by every mod. This is especially true on the soccer forum IMO.

Edit: I'm the sure the mods aside from GY would have some posters defending them.

IMO GY is to heavy handed in dealing with matters. There were two options when dealing with the original thankers infract or ban. Why was the heavier option choosen? Why didn't you ban the posters when you must have seen the the thanks.?

The Recliner

The Recliner wrote: »

And they didn't do it to make a point or a protest, the did it for a laugh

How exactly do you know why I did it? Did I tell you? Cos I don't remember.


I did it because I found Pigheads post to be the funniest post I'd read on this site ALL WEEK. I would have thanked it earlier but had no thanks left (due to ironically thanking other posts that may or may not have been intelligent...) I then saw users getting banned for it which i don;t agree with so i went and thanked it anyway. It's called standing by your principles, not having a laugh, so you can nip that argument in the bud right there mate.

mike65

GY isn't much respected as there is a feeling that she is something of a humourless automaton in the way she carries out her duties. She is not one for banter or craic on the soccer board and as such she has built up no goodwill whatsoever with regular users, who view her as more of a hindrerance to the board than a help by this stage I suspect.

On a related matter I think part of the problem is the infraction system itself, back when I was modding "full time" it didn't exist and I'm glad. First problem with cards is that its a quick easy way of dishing out punishment requiring no real thought as to the consquences.

Having to take a minute and write out a PM stating why someone deserves a repremand means thinking about what you are doing, so there is less chance of acting in haste.

Also (and I could be quite wrong) it appears that the yellow card option is frequently overlooked and a straight red is shown, if this is the case then the admins need to have a word with the mods and ask them to be more careful.

At my busiest I was looking after 6/8 fora, hardly anyone got banned those that did were usually pimps and those who had emtered a thread simply for one purpose - sh1t stirring. All other transgressions were dealt with on the thread with a light-hearted but clear warning or via PMs.

Now all my forums put together would have been less "fractious" than Soccer but that doesn't mean Mods have to be any less human to get the job done. A bit of common sense rather than following the letter of the law would not go amiss.

Ban those who cause the board to stop working effectively - but no-one else.

Xavi6

alanmurphy83 wrote: »

Why was the heavier option choosen? Why didn't you ban the posters when you must have seen the the thanks.?

Because, seeing as I'm only in the role a few weeks, I thought it better to liase with someone more experienced before making such a decision. It was the first time I had to deal with such a situation. GY was online at the time and I spoke with her about it.

I was also in work at the time.

Spud83

Xavi6 wrote: »

Because, seeing as I'm only in the role a few weeks, I thought it better to liase with someone more experienced before making such a decision. It was the first time I had to deal with such a situation. GY was online at the time and I spoke with her about it.

I was also in work at the time.

Ok so that explains why you didn't do it. Can you explain why the heavier option was taken since you spoke to GY about it ?

Xavi6

alanmurphy83 wrote: »

Ok so that explains why you didn't do it. Can you explain why the heavier option was taken since you spoke to GY about it ?

Yes.

There was a precident set down when Killme00 got done for thanking a post. GY was merely trying to keep things consistent.

Spud83

Xavi6 wrote: »

Yes.

There was a precident set down when Killme00 got done for thanking a post. GY was merely trying to keep things consistent.

Who set the precident?

Xavi6

alanmurphy83 wrote: »

Who set the precident?

The soccer mods who made the rule (before I started).

It was not GY's suggestion btw before the knives come out.

Xavi6

Xavi6 wrote: »

The soccer mods who made the rule (before I started).

It was not GY's suggestion btw before the knives come out.

I have a PM sent to me quite some time ago (that she still hasn't given me permission to post) that suggest otherwise.

Sherifu

alanmurphy83 wrote: »

Who set the precident?

Looking through my infractions* I got a yellow card in Sept for thanking a post in soccer.

Profile Warning 20-09-2008
22:27 Expired 0 Being Naughty GuanYin

I didn't bother arguing it at the time. It was only a slap on the wrists.

Now it has turned into taking away access rights for a week and having us reapply for access. Some great consistancy there xavi6.


*That's the only infraction I have. :rolleyes:

Spud83

Xavi6 wrote: »

The soccer mods who made the rule (before I started).

It was not GY's suggestion btw before the knives come out.

No the charter says in a minor offence and can result in an infraction or MAYBE a ban. That's what was agreed by the mods. Who banned killem0 was my question as that has seemed to change the rule to automatic ban

Xavi6

Deleted User wrote: »

I have a PM sent to me quite some time ago (that she still hasn't given me permission to post) that suggest otherwise.

Well I can only go on what I've been told

/shrug

Xavi6

Xavi6 wrote: »

Well I can only go on what I've been told

/shrug

That's fair enough man.


I just read the PM again (it was sent on the 29th of November) and it makes it seem VERY much like it was GY's idea. So I, like you, am only going by what I see. The reason I got the PM about it was because she was using a post I thanked as an example. I pointed out to her that T4TF had also thanked the post (he's since removed his thanks) and got nothing back from her about it. Which is of course...part of the problem. If an argument doesn't go her way you get a wall of silence.


Actually, its a series of PMs and it actually seems more clear having read the rest that it was her project pushed through. I'll post the whole conversation along with what I said back to her if she allows me to.

Pighead

What a mess! Apologies to the bannees and the mods. Pighead never for one moment thought that his "Roy Keane" pretend rant would cause this much fuss. It was never ever meant as abuse and the suggestions that it was are a wide of the mark.

It was a pretty pointless post as it could only ever end in a banning but that's what the early hours and a few alcoholic beverages do to your decision making skills. As keane2097 has already stated we PM'd each other just to clarify that it wasn't abuse early on in the proceedings. Anyway, hopefully the bannings can be lifted and something sorted out to make us all happy again.

Sherifu

Xavi6 wrote: »

The soccer mods who made the rule (before I started).

It was not GY's suggestion btw before the knives come out.

The PM removing our permissions from Soccer certainly suggest it was GYs idea.

Hey Pighead .o/

Xavi6

Hopefully one of the other mods will be along to clear that up because, as I said, it was before my time and I'm just relaying what I've been told.

Pighead

Sherifu wrote: »

Hey Pighead .o/

Morning Sherifu. You banned as well?

Sorry Xavi. Not having a go at you dude. It's unfair for you to be singled out over something before your time just because you're the only one online.


Morning Pighead. We're not banned, we're "removed" and to get back in we have to grovel.

Sherifu

Pighead wrote: »

Morning Sherifu. You banned as well?

Posting rights removed or some such. Reapply for access. Petty, childish modding at its finest.

mike65

You can still thank, thank goodness.

Sherifu

mike65 wrote: »

You can still thank, thank goodness.

Already thanked one or two in the off topic thread. Kinda funny still being able to thank in there

mike65

mike65 wrote: »

You can still thank, thank goodness.

Did ya notice the irony of user "SlashEQ" thanking every post on the first page!! Funny sh1t!! Thank God for thanks!

Thanx 4 The Fish

Sorry for getting involved in this so late. I do not check feedback all that often, particularly not of late as things have been running well.

So what seems to be the problem then ?

As I see it.

Somebody broke the rules.
Other people broke the rules and may or may not have done so ironically or in jest.
Other people broke the rules as an FU to the soccer mods/rules/something like that.

Now we are in feedback, and there is a thread that is almost twenty pages long that basically slags off GY.

I agree with Xavi (surprised anyone ?). Why did nobody complain about the rules when they were put in place? Why is it that the only time that soimebody complains about the rules is when they break them? We had a thread on the discussion of the rules, there was not a huge lashback against the rule when it was implemented.

So how do we see ourselves clear of this?

Well as far as I see it Pigheads ban was deserved, regardless of who he was parodying, he was abusive, even the subject of the abuse did not understand that he was only joking.

As for the thansk issue, well it is a rule and so is being applied, if we were to say it's okay because the thankers thought he was only joking then we would set a dangerous precedent as anybody could use that as a defence and quote this instance.

If this is going to kick off any time somebody thanks an abusive post then perhaps removing the thanks is the way to go. It would be a shame that such a tool, which I quite like, had to be removed from the forum because it was being abused but if people cannot play nice with the toys that are available (not meaning to sound like I am speaking down to people BTW, just dealing with my kids gives me lots of similar situations in real life to draw on) then the toys can be taken off them. I do not think that this solution would be one that most of the users would like but then most of the users are not the ones that have abused it and most of the users are not here on this thread calling people names and calling for heads to roll and whatnot.

I am not sure how I see this pans out for the banned. Those who were originally banned may feel somewhat aggrieved if as they say they saw it as a brilliant parody of an interview from days of yore. The rules were there though and regardless of whether you like them, they have to be applied. If that keane lad did not see the funny side of this he would probably be the first person on feedback claiming bias against Man U fans because all of those people basically abused him by thanking a post that attacked him.

As for those who thanked in protest. I think the bans were deserved, ye knew the decision that was taken and then decided to push it because you did not like it.

BTW Neil, the rules of the soccer forum do not apply in other forums. If I thank an abusive post there and am banned for it then so be it, I agreed with the sentiment of the post and thanked it.

Sherifu

Why was the post deleted T4TF?

And what would happen if posters kept thanking it?

How far will this rule go?

Do you think it's a good rule?