Banned from Soccer forum for "thanks"

GuanYin

Just FYI.

I didn't ban pighead. I didn't even see the issue until a user complained. At that point, as far as I know, Pighead had admitted that he meant the post as abuse towards the user. So we had abuse + intent = ban.

Hence the ban stood and he got a red card.

For what its worth, you agreed with the rules, when you saw the big red card, knew that Xavi had banned Pighead and still thanked the post, you took matters out of anyones hands.

You can whinge all you like and blame me. There are many ways to protest, deliberately breaking the rules to see how I'll react and then coplaining when I ban you is just childish. If you don't want to come back to soccer, that is up to you.

Noone forced you to act as you have.

Daithi McGee

Recipients: alan dunne 27, Chucky the tree, Daithi McGee, dK1NG, Iago, lorweld, Ludo, Mellor, mike65, monkey9, Neil1984, Sherifu, Sirtoyou, Smegball, smurph

Permissions cleared from Soccer
Hi,

You have had your access removed from Soccer for the following duration:

7 Days

for the following reason:

Thanking abusive posts.

As this appears to be both deliberate and you do not seem to be abiding by the forum rules, this is not a ban, rather we have revoked your permissions for soccer.

You may reapply for soccer access via the soccer access requests forum in one week if you wish your access restored.

Also, please be aware that an abusive response to this automated message may result in an extension of your ban, or in extreme cases, being banned from the entire site.

Thanks,

GuanYin
________

As it was sent to many, not a PM. More a general message.

javaboy

Deleted User wrote: »

Nah, I think as long as you're modding the forum I'm not bothered tbh. If you're gonna turn it into some kind of "come crawling back" thing over thanked posts then I'd rather not bother. I've been posting there for the guts of about 2 years and received one infraction before for rising to bait rather than st1rring anything. I think most people would say I behave well in there. Mike65 is a posted that I never see starting or getting involved in silly flame wars and yet you're gonna make us crawl back with special conditions.



Nah you're ok thanks.

I think the rule is a bit harsh tbh. But if you've got a problem with a rule in the charter, acting the martyr and getting yourselves banned isn't the way to go about getting it changed.

The people who thanked the post after reading through this thread deliberately broke the charter no matter what they think of the rule itself. What do you expect the mods to do when people publicly hold a little protest and deliberately break the rules?

I've seen an awful lot of posters thanking abusive posts in a sly way. Imo that kind of thing deserves an infraction at the least and on a case by case basis maybe more than that. I know this post was different because Pighead was parodying the Dunphy rant and I thought it was funny in context but I could see it was going to get him banned. Not everybody even in Soccer is going to recognise the joke and if those people who don't see that a bunch of people thanked it and that the post was from a well-respected regular, they might get some wrong ideas about how the site works.

I really can't see what else people expected to happen when they deliberately broke the rules like this.

Charlie

GuanYin wrote: »

I take no pleasure in banning anyone

Good one.

redout

GuanYin wrote: »

Everyone who thanked the post has had their permissions form soccer removed.

They're not banned per se, they just no longer have posting rights.

You may re-apply for soccer access via soccer access requests in one week.

I'm not going to say you'll get your access restored. You've deliberately breached the rules so I may lay some special conditions on your access, maybe even a probationary period, because NORMALLY if someone deliberately broke the rules, they would be looking at at least a month ban.

The original 5 who were banned before this thread will have their access automatically restored in one week from yesterday.

I take no pleasure in banning anyone, but if you wanted to test to see what would happen if you rocked the boat, take this as the answer.

I was one of the original six who were banned by you according to the pm I recieved last night. Has somebody been omitted ? This aint being smart. I am serious.

javaboy

deise59 wrote: »

So you've spent the past number of days insisting on how important it is to follow by the rules and sticking to the charter....

...and then you make up your own rule by suddenly removing everyones access to the forum and threatening to never reinstate them.

Nowhere is it said in the charter such action can be taken after thanking an abusive post.

The Charter wrote:

Minor Offences (including but not limited to):
Abuse of players.
Threadspoiling
Flamebaiting in threads.
Debating moderation in threads.
Mild flaming or trolling.
Provocation.
Derailing or off topic posting in super threads.
Accusing a member of trolling/being a troll
Misuse of the Reported Post system
Backseat moderating
Abusing through the thanks system (thanking posts that break the rules)

Major Offences (including but not limited to):
Blatant or deliberate breach of charter.
Misuse of tagging system
Abuse of users.
Flaming
Trolling
Breaking a boards.ie rule
Outright abuse (of anyone)

Thanking a post that breaches the rules is a minor offence but I've highlighted in bold the major offence that people committed. Basically people have said they are no longer willing to abide by the rules they agreed to abide by so they had their permissions revoked.

GuanYin

redout wrote: »

I was one of the original six who were banned by you according to the pm I recieved last night. Has somebody been omitted ? This aint being smart. I am serious.

errr 6 then. I was multitasking when I counted.:o

The Muppet

Daithi McGee wrote:

,


As this appears to be both deliberate and you do not seem to be abiding by the forum rules, this is not a ban, rather we have revoked your permissions for soccer.



Also, please be aware that an abusive response to this automated message may result in an extension of your ban, or in extreme cases, being banned from the entire site.

Thanks,

GuanYin
.

Now I is confused

Daithi McGee

GuanYin wrote: »

errr 6 then. I was multitasking when I counted.:o

Pay more attention when banning people tbh.

Feelings are involved.

GuanYin

The Muppet wrote: »

Now I is confused

I didn't edit the automated response boards generates.


You know you all act like this and then wonder why we have to put such rules in place to begin with.

*shakes head*

GuanYin

Daithi McGee wrote: »

Pay more attention when banning people tbh.

Feelings are involved.

Pfft noone cares about my feelings.

Daithi McGee

The Muppet wrote: »

Now I is confused

It is not like you are being arrested, Just we are putting the cuffs on and putting you in a cell.

More a relocation.

GuanYin

GuanYin wrote: »

Just FYI.

I didn't ban pighead. I didn't even see the issue until a user complained. At that point, as far as I know, Pighead had admitted that he meant the post as abuse towards the user. So we had abuse + intent = ban.

Hence the ban stood and he got a red card.

For what its worth, you agreed with the rules, when you saw the big red card, knew that Xavi had banned Pighead and still thanked the post, you took matters out of anyones hands.

You can whinge all you like and blame me. There are many ways to protest, deliberately breaking the rules to see how I'll react and then coplaining when I ban you is just childish. If you don't want to come back to soccer, that is up to you.

Noone forced you to act as you have.

I find it laughable that you of all people are talking about childishness after the little OTT-gate incident where u got in a strop and closed the OTT thread over something that happened in here. You acted the drama queen there and were willing to kill everyone elses fun cos YOU weren't happy. I find it laughable that you talk about childishness when you treat the soccer forum as your own personal self important power trip by applying a whole load of stupid rules (see soccer off Topic Thread 3 1st post.....I agree with many of them but some of them are just being petty for the sake of it). You almost killed the fun of the old OTT thread with your constant complaining about pretty much everything anytime the banter got going despite the fact that the other mods had said nothing about any of the issues you moaned about.

As far as I'm concerned the "Thanks" feature is taken with a pinch of salt. I also thought Pigheads post was absolutely hilarious. I spilled my tea when I read it the first time. I would have thanked it but I had no thanks left. Then I saw this thread and figured why not, I mean you probably would have caught me for something sooner or later right

I wouldn't even mind the removal of rights. Its the come crawling back that I don't like. Yea we deliberately breached charter and knew we'd get a ban but as usual you are not satisfied with that. You are caught up enough in your own power as it is without me bowing to you for your own ego. Like I said, no thanks.

Daithi McGee

GuanYin wrote: »

Pfft noone cares about my feelings.

They do really Simon

The Muppet

GuanYin wrote: »

I didn't edit the automated response boards generates.


You know you all act like this and then wonder why we have to put such rules in place to begin with.

*shakes head*

Just joking with you, lighten up it's only the internet,

I nearly forgot that the woe's of the soccer forum are all my fault, Thanks for the reminder.:)

Daysha

GuanYin, it's obvious by now that you've made your feelings known as to why you've removed access for new posters who thanked the post,

But can you please explain to us why a full weeks ban was given to the original 6 who thanked the post? The overwhelming majority of us here feel that was a bit harsh, and a simple infraction would have sufficed.

Chucky the tree

GuanYin wrote: »

You know you all act like this and then wonder why we have to put such rules in place to begin with.

Who's idea is it to put these rules in place? I always found it strange how all the issues with the forum are due to rules that it seems you put in place. I'd be curious to know that do all changes to the charter/the rules in the OTT get put to a vote amongst all the soccer mods?

GuanYin

deise59 wrote: »

GuanYin, it's obvious by now that you've made your feelings known as to why you've removed access for new posters who thanked the post,

But can you please explain to us why a full weeks ban was given to the original 6 who thanked the post? The overwhelming majority of us here feel that was a bit harsh, and a simple infraction would have sufficed.

They thanked an abusive post. Just because it was comical doesn't mean it wasn't intended. The poster in question admitted intent.

Just because something is a bit funny doesn't mean the rules go out the window.

I could do that and then the next time someone gets nasty they'll point to the last time when we didn't ban and we'll get a feedback thread about how the rules are inconsistant.

mike65

For the night thats in it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16u0wwCfoJ4

Charlie

GuanYin wrote: »

I could do that and then the next time someone gets nasty they'll point to the last time when we didn't ban and we'll get a feedback thread about how the rules are inconsistant.

Unlikely. I think the majority of us would appreciate the application of common sense and fairness. I think that's what the majority of us seek.

That, and to be treated as contributors, and not 'privilege seekers'.

Xavi6

redout wrote: »

Nice to see some of the soccer lads on here showing solidarity. Viva La Revolucion brothers !

Revolution my hoop :rolleyes:

Ludo wrote: »

Did the mod even "get" the joke? I do seem to recall a certain soccer mod saying in the past that he had no interest in soccer at all. Is this what happened? Mod doesn't know enough about the subject he is modding to get a joke and as a result completely over-reacts?

Hello sir, you have just failed at presuming.

I banned Pighead because his albeit clever parody was an attempt to gloss over what was personal abuse.

As I said on the thread, I couldn't give a flying fuck who he was quoting or what sort of disguise he was putting on it. It was abuse and warrants a ban. That's a fact.

As for those thanking the post, I issued an on thread warning for people to drop and not refer to it in any way again. I did it twice infact. Yet we have people thanking the post after which is basically a two fingered salute to my on thread warning. Cheers for the respect boys.

The Muppet

GuanYin wrote: »

They thanked an abusive post. Just because it was comical doesn't mean it wasn't intended. The poster in question admitted intent.

Just because something is a bit funny doesn't mean the rules go out the window.

I could do that and then the next time someone gets nasty they'll point to the last time when we didn't ban and we'll get a feedback thread about how the rules are inconsistant.

Even if Pighead did intend to be abusive the users banned for thanking the post were not to know that and so were not knowingly thanking an abusive post.

Daysha

GuanYin wrote: »

They thanked an abusive post. Just because it was comical doesn't mean it wasn't intended. The poster in question admitted intent.

Just because Pighead admitted intent doesn't mean the posters who thanked the post feel the same thing.

GuanYin wrote: »

Just because something is a bit funny doesn't mean the rules go out the window.

I never said they did.

GuanYin wrote: »

I could do that and then the next time someone gets nasty they'll point to the last time when we didn't ban and we'll get a feedback thread about how the rules are inconsistant.

So you think the banning (or whatever you're calling it) of 15 people is a better solution than the fear of another feedback thread?

I'll say it once more. There is no need for a week ban for someone who may simply have found humour in the post. I found it funny once I understood the joke, tons of posters in this topic found it funny, and even one of your fellow mods of the soccer forum said it was "hilarious".

Common sense has to prevail here.

Xavi6

Xavi6 wrote: »

As for those thanking the post, I issued an on thread warning for people to drop and not refer to it in any way again. I did it twice infact. Yet we have people thanking the post after which is basically a two fingered salute to my on thread warning. Cheers for the respect boys.

I saw the post and didn't read on after cos I was in work earlier.


I saw it again after in isolation through Des' link. I didn't see your warnings. You know well that i respect you dude. For all the ribbings we gave u when u got soccer mod, u know that we all supported you 100%

Sherifu

Why wasn't the post deleted from the start?

Thanks for the ban GY. I do think you like banning people tbh.

Soccer forum has been a joke lately.

GuanYin

The Muppet wrote: »

Even if Pighead did intend to be abusive the users banned for thanking the post were not to know that and so were not knowingly thanking an abusive post.

Except for the big red card beside the thread and Xavi's posted warnings.

Sherifu wrote:

Soccer forum has been a joke lately.

Is that aimed at me? I've been AWOL from modding for nearly 2 months.

Listen, the 15 posters knowingly and purposefully broke the rules (although only, it seems, because of who they thought issued them). Even if we changed the rule tomorrow, they're staying out for a week.

Charlie

Xavi6 wrote: »

As for those thanking the post, I issued an on thread warning for people to drop and not refer to it in any way again. I did it twice infact. Yet we have people thanking the post after which is basically a two fingered salute to my on thread warning. Cheers for the respect boys.

You've changed.

RoundTower

Ludo wrote: »

PigHeads post was a class piss take...funniest thing I have seen on here in a long time and should be post of the day. I can understand why the mod banned him but to ban the people who thanked him is a joke.

Did the mod even "get" the joke? I do seem to recall a certain soccer mod saying in the past that he had no interest in soccer at all. Is this what happened? Mod doesn't know enough about the subject he is modding to get a joke and as a result completely over-reacts?

I'm not up with all the drama but would this be the same mod that this post was about?

hotspur wrote:

I think if there's a lesson here is that someone who is a mod of the paranormal forum shouldn't be allowed within 500 yards of being a mod of the soccer forum irrespective of gender. You'll notice in this thread that the people backing her up are mods of the paranormal or paganism type forums. I imagine being a mod of the soccer forum requires having a bit more "cop on" than you are likely to get from the "ghosts are real, btw I'm a witch brigade".

GuanYin it is abundantly clear to anyone reading your language in this thread with a neutral eye that your attitude reeks of a power trip, talking about privileges versus rights etc. Grow up / get laid / find something in your life which genuinely empowers you so you don't have to annoy others by sublimating your obvious profound sense of disenfranchisement. Posting a picture in an ott soccer forum thread obviously isn't your issue, find out what is so you can let other people enjoy more freedom of expression. You have a psychological issue with this which is clear from your language. Resolve that and you'll be a better mod and person.

Xavi6

Deleted User wrote: »

I saw the post and didn't read on after cos I was in work earlier.


I saw it again after in isolation through Des' link. I didn't see your warnings. You know well that i respect you dude. For all the ribbings we gave u when u got soccer mod, u know that we all supported you 100%

Sorry man but it's kick in the teeth to see people here circling the wagons and martyring themselves over what was a perfectly correct decision as per the charter of the forum.

Respect works both ways between mods and users, but with the way people are talking to GY on this thread it's clear that some people only work one way.

Sherifu wrote: »

Why wasn't the post deleted from the start?

To stop the inevitable "Why was Pighead banned?" questions.

Charlie wrote: »

You've changed.

I don't see how

redout

Xavi6 wrote: »

As for those thanking the post, I issued an on thread warning for people to drop and not refer to it in any way again. I did it twice infact. Yet we have people thanking the post after which is basically a two fingered salute to my on thread warning. Cheers for the respect boys.

Yes you did and I read it and stopped as you requested.

GuanYin wrote: »

Except for the big red card beside the thread and Xavi's posted warnings.

Yes Xavi warned us. I abided by Xavi6 warning yet you still came and banned me after ?