Banned from Soccer forum for "thanks"

ntlbell

Thanx 4 The Fish wrote: »

Never fncking happy are you boggles. I would imagine that even if your beloved Man U manager came up with the resolution you would be looking to call somebody names. :rolleyes:

The man u manager is far too busy celebrating his return to the top of the premiership tbh...

redout

GuanYin wrote: »

Right. The posters who thanked the post originally will be unbanned on monday. Those who are currently on a 7 day ban will be unbanned on Monday night (if for any reason you find youself without access, PM me and I'll do it manually).

The posters who decided to deliberately break the rules, discussed it here and suggested others do it, will remain without access for 7 days after which they may apply through soccer access requests. This is in lieu if a 1 month ban for pre-meditated breach of the rules.


Noone has received and infraction yet and I'll hold off on those for now (unless someone wants one).

Yippee........so after 64 hours and 480 replies later mods have made a decision to try a settle this once and for all. On first glance I can see that this decision will not appease everyone. I do have an important question though. I have noticed that you have not mentioned anything about future incidents of this nature. I take it from the non-mention then that thanking a post deemed abusive by mods automatically will incur a 4 day ban purely by viewing what happened here then. Is that correct ?

GuanYin

ntlbell wrote: »

What's the reasoning behind making them re-apply for access?

They voided the previous access request when they planned to break the rules. They no longer agreed to abide by the rules.

ntlbell

GuanYin wrote: »

They voided the previous access request when they planned to break the rules. They no longer agreed to abide by the rules.

So after the week ban the re-apply and will automatically grant them access?

or is it a case they may not be granted access? if it's the former I'm still confused why they re=apply if it's going to be automatically granted?

GuanYin

redout wrote: »

Yippee........so after 64 hours and 480 replies later mods have made a decision to try a settle this once and for all. On first glance I can see that this decision will not appease everyone. I do have an important question though. I have noticed that you have not mentioned anything about future incidents of this nature. I take it from the non-mention then that thanking a post deemed abusive by mods automatically will incur a 4 day ban purely by viewing what happened here then. Is that correct ?

Thanking an abusive post will probably get you a ban. Thanking a rule breaking post will probably get you a yellow card. Based on feedback we will try and take them on a case by case in terms of severity. However, thanking any abusive post, humorous or not, will incur some punishment.

GuanYin

ntlbell wrote: »

So after the week ban the re-apply and will automatically grant them access?

or is it a case they may not be granted access? if it's the former I'm still confused why they re=apply if it's going to be automatically granted?

That is between the soccer mods and them.

Thanx 4 The Fish

ntlbell wrote: »

What's the reasoning behind making them re-apply for access?

They went out purposely to break the rules. It was a considered opinion and they knew what they were doing when the offence was committed. The re-application is an assertion that those members will adhere to the rules as they are written. If they chose not to then so be it.

The Muppet

GuanYin wrote: »

The Muppet, I'm unsure if you're trying to troll or not, but really, considering your relationship with soccer, comments like this and the one directed at javaboy it probably don't serve you any good.

You know me, wheter it serves me good or not I am always willing to give my honest opinion.

my relationship with the soccer forum has noting to do with this thread but as you have broached the subject I will say this . I am excluded from it for the past year and a half, yes I have requested to be re admitted as I would like to have access to it again. If expressing my genunine opinions here damages my prospects or being re admitted so be it.

Daysha

GuanYin wrote: »

That is between the soccer mods and them.

Is it? Because if there is any possibility what so ever that some of the established soccer posters might not get back in, then surely we have a right in feedback to say why we feel that shouldn't happen.

Still waiting on your response to post 420 here as well.

GuanYin

The Muppet wrote: »

You know me, wheter it serves me good or not I am always willing to give my honest opinion.

I'll raise my eyebrows to this one

my relationship with the soccer forum has noting to do with this thread but as you have broached the subject I will say this . I am excluded from it for the past year and a half, yes I have requested to be re admitted as I would like to have access to it again. If expressing my genunine opinions here damages my prospects or being re admitted so be it.

This isn't an issue for feedback. if you want to discuss your access, start a helpdesk thread.

The Muppet

GuanYin wrote: »

I'll raise my eyebrows to this one .

One mans opinion is anothers flamebait.

GuanYin wrote: »

This isn't an issue for feedback. if you want to discuss your access, start a helpdesk thread.

I don't want to discuss my access, you raised the subject for some reason only known to yourself.

Villain

GuanYin what you think of my suggestion: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=58653513&postcount=463

I think we need clarity on the thanking posts rule, i.e. if you thank a post that a poster gets banned for are you banned also?

Daysha

Villain wrote: »

I think we need clarity on the thanking posts rule, i.e. if you thank a post that a poster gets banned for are you banned also?

And to follow up on that, are the lengths of the ban going to be the same for both the poster and the thanker?

Still waiting on my response too btw.

Thanx 4 The Fish

The Muppet wrote: »

It's sad to see community spirit being punished so severly on a community site like boards. I would have though supporting such comradery would be benefical to the soccer forum and the site in general.

Is that the community spirit you were so happy to disregard on each occasion that you abused other members subsequently receiving 2 perm bans (yes we let him back in despite his previous perm ban and he let the community down again) from the soccer forum. :rolleyes:

The Muppet

Thanx 4 The Fish wrote: »

Is that the community spirit you were so happy to disregard on each occasion that you abused other members subsequently receiving 2 perm bans (yes we let him back in despite his previous perm ban and he let the community down again) from the soccer forum. :rolleyes:

Whats this, get me time?

You should be aware of all the facts before making such statements. I was invited back in the first time as the mod at the time told me I was not the cause of the problem. Check with him if you want.

As is all too evident in this thread If someone doesn't toe the line it's very easy to lose ones posting rights in soccer, there are plenty of such users here.

GuanYin

Villain wrote: »

GuanYin what you think of my suggestion: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=58653513&postcount=463

I think we need clarity on the thanking posts rule, i.e. if you thank a post that a poster gets banned for are you banned also?

You know, I had a long discussion with a co-mod of another forum about writing charters and that mod was of the opinion that charters were a waste of time, that users will never read a charter and only ever use it to find loopholes, much like a map of traps to be avoided. The mod in question likes to keep the rules simple, do something stupid and you're banned. There is a nice simplicity to that and I wish it would work in soccer, I'd even like to try it if I didn't think the site might crash with the ensuing anarchy

I think your suggestions are very much in line with what we have already. In honesty, I think our red/yellow card system works fine and we have only 2 season long bans so far.

Regarding the thanks system. I've outlined it already, we're going to try case-by-case. That means calls for consistancy are out the window, because we'll be making "judgement calls" on the incidents. DeVore has agreed with our view of thanking abusive posts so I think that ends the debate on whether it stays or goes.

Of course, the ideal scenario is... don't than a post that breaks the rules.

Why doesn't anyone focus on that part ?

Ludo

javaboy wrote: »

Anyone that has been around here as long as mike65 knows how things are done too. Getting themselves banned was just adding fuel to the fire. It's not the way things get done around here.

That is the type of attitude that keeps things stuck in the mud. "Oh it is the way it is always been done". Give me a break. Things change over time and they change when scenarios crop up which show the incorrectness of the "way it is done around here".

I got myself banned from soccer over this by thanking the post to make a protest at a stupid rule and to point out the silliness of it (and certainly not for a laugh or to cause trouble as someone said earlier). It has taken two days to get this ruling undone and even then no admission of a mistake has been made.
Sometimes the masses have to stand up and protest a stupid decision/rule to get anything done about it.

I fail to see why we are being singled out for special treatment as technically ANY rule infringement which results in a ban is a breach of the rules a poster agreed to and therefore should have to go re-apply for access again which we are being subjected to.

The ban doesn't bother me in the slightest as I don't post in soccer anyway. I read it regularly and will continue to do so, but I definitely will not be begging for my post access to be restored simply because some mods nose is out of joint at having to change a decision they made which all resulted from a silly rule.

By the way GuanYin, your last post above makes perfect sense (except for the bans for thanking bit).

javaboy

Ludo wrote: »

That is the type of attitude that keeps things stuck in the mud. "Oh it is the way it is always been done". Give me a break. Things change over time and they change when scenarios crop up which show the incorrectness of the "way it is done around here".

You're the second person to misinterpret where I'm coming from so I'll explain my position. I'm not saying lie back and accept a rule or ruling that you feel is unjust or unfair. I'm saying post rationally in feedback/help desk or PM the mods about it instead of martyring yourselves getting banned.

That's what I mean when I talk about "how things are done around here".

Ludo

javaboy wrote: »

You're the second person to misinterpret where I'm coming from so I'll explain my position. I'm not saying lie back and accept a rule or ruling that you feel is unjust or unfair. I'm saying post rationally in feedback/help desk or PM the mods about it instead of martyring yourselves getting banned.

That's what I mean when I talk about "how things are done around here".

Fair enough JavaBoy. But enough people had done that already so I figured what the hell....thanks is there for a reason...may as well thank a brilliant post and make a statement at the same time.

The Muppet

javaboy wrote: »

You're the second person to misinterpret where I'm coming from so I'll explain my position. I'm not saying lie back and accept a rule or ruling that you feel is unjust or unfair. I'm saying post rationally in feedback/help desk or PM the mods about it instead of martyring yourselves getting banned.

That's what I mean when I talk about "how things are done around here".

In this instance there was a post in feedback that was getting nowhere. we were told that Pig Head had admitted to deliberately being abusive (which later transpired not to be true at all) and the punishmenst were appropriate. It was only after Devores intervention that common sense started to prevail.

Look at our join dates and post counts, what makes you think you should have to tell us how things work around here?

_blank_

The Muppet wrote: »

we were told that Pig Head had admitted to deliberately being abusive (which later transpired not to be true at all)

yeah, actually.

what's going on there?

why did people say that pighead admitted to being abusive, when he clearly states, over and over in this thread, that he didn't.

javaboy

The Muppet wrote: »

In this instance there was a post in feedback that was getting nowhere. we were told that Pig Head had admitted to deliberately being abusive (which later transpired not to be true at all) and the punishmenst were appropriate. It was only after Devores intervention that commons sense started to prevail.

That Pighead hadn't intended it as abuse and that keane2097 no longer saw it as abuse would have come out anyway. DeVore probably would have intervened if enough people had posted in Feedback about it.

People getting themselves banned just made them look bad and clouded the issue. I understand why some of them did it but how did they expect the mods to react? They couldn't let people deliberately undermine their authority like that without doing something.

Look at our join dates and post counts, what makes you think you should have to tell us how things work around here?

I'm around here long enough to know that doesn't count for anything. :cool:

GuanYin

Des wrote: »

yeah, actually.

what's going on there?

why did people say that pighead admitted to being abusive, when he clearly states, over and over in this thread, that he didn't.

Because from his PM discussion with Xavi at the time of the ban, he indicated that he meant the abuse.

I did mention this already.

Ludo

Well someone is mistaken or deliberately trying to mislead here.

Pighead admitted to meaning abuse in PM.

Pighead denies meaning to abuse the poster but was having a laugh.

hmmm...wonder which is the real version.

The Muppet

javaboy wrote: »

I'm around here long enough to know that doesn't count for anything. :cool:

What doesn't count for anything?

If you mean joine date/postcount it should mean that someone here longer than you are well aware of how this site functions without you having to tell them.

GuanYin

Ludo wrote: »

Well someone is mistaken or deliberately trying to mislead here.

Pighead admitted to meaning abuse in PM.

Pighead denies meaning to abuse the poster but was having a laugh.

hmmm...wonder which is the real version.

The PM conversation wasn't with me.

I can tell you that Pighead was asked why he posted the abusive post, his response was to quote Keane's admission to premeditating his tackling Haaland and then say he accepted the weeks ban.

I guess retrospectively you could argue Pighead's response, but if he didn't mean it as abuse, why not just say so? He didn't do himself or anyone else any favors with his response which jus indcated he thought the ban fair and he intended it. Pighead didn't come here claiming he didn't mean the abuse until all hell had already broken loose at the time of his post he made no such claim.

Thanx 4 The Fish

The Muppet wrote: »

What doesn't count for anything?

If you mean joine date/postcount it should mean that someone here longer than you are well aware of how this site functions without you having to tell them.

And yet he has yet to be banned permanently from soccer, TWICE. He seems to know better than some in this thread how this site functions.

Villain

Decisions are made why not just lock this?

_blank_

GuanYin wrote: »

Pighead didn't come here claiming he didn't mean the abuse until all hell had already broken loose at the time of his post he made no such claim.

how disingenuous is this?

it's ok for a moderator to say they haven't been online to reply to a fb thread, but if a user hasn't posted in a while, and then comes back when the brown stuff hits the fan, he's called on it?

I also love the way the moderators are using the "The Muppet" siataution to frag this off topic.

If decisions are made, and are being kept as it, then I'm unhappy about that.

Just to register my dissatisfaction.

What if I thank a post that I, personally, don't find to be abusive, but then some mod comes along, decides it's abusive, and I end up with a ban?

As I said earlier.

A joke.

Nothing's changed.

Again.

GuanYin

The Muppet wrote: »

What doesn't count for anything?

If you mean joine date/postcount it should mean that someone here longer than you are well aware of how this site functions without you having to tell them.

Nonsense. There are plenty of poster who have been here for a long time who still don't understand how the site works and still get banned, site-banned or perm-banned.

Join date doesn't mean anything and many argue that javaboy has a better understanding and has contributed more than many posters who have been members twice as long.