Soccer forum. Re: Economist thread.

Time Magazine

Minesajackdaniels wrote: »

What, cogent opposing arguments delivered at lightning speed within a specific window of opportunity that allows us to react both instantly and in a well considered fashion?

You don't need to react instantly. I see no harm whatsoever in letting people air their opinions (obviously moderate the thread to maintain a nice light:heat ratio) and post a genuine "Thank you for your contribution. We'll take it on board." for the first while then, if you really wanted, to respond with a "Okay, but what about...?" later. Neither of these posts commit you to anything, nor require an instantaneous well-guided response.

This is not a black and white issue.

I never claimed that it was. In fact I even openly admitted it was a difficult situation and this formed the primary basis for me urging you to not silence dissent.

Subsequently debate takes time.

I, nor anyone else that I can see, suggested that the admins were to have their 100-page final word report on this done by noon the following afternoon. What I did suggest was that you listen to all sides of the argument before assuming you can adequately gauge everything yourselves.

It's still ongoing, if you haven't noticed.

There is absolutely no need for the tone.

Temporary measures were put in place initially, and Helix's reaction to those measures did more to make them worse than anything else.

That's both true and simultaneously entirely irrelevant because whether Helix's contribution supports his case or not has no bearing whatsoever on whether you should close off discussion or not.

ShooterSF

I don't know the answer to this question and I will try and check it out now. I ask it first to keep it unbiased, rather than asking it only if it supports one side of the argument.
Was it made clear early that it was just a temp ban while the admins discussed what to do?

Obviously if not it causes un-needed hassle where the two sides see the ban as something entirely different, i.e one permanent one temporary (with the possibility of being permanent).
If it was made clear then maybe Helix and some of us were too quick to react.

tallaght01

trojan wrote:

Helix: I was one of the admins to vote for your permaban, and it was not knee-jerk by any means.

helix wrote:

Is the official line then, that I've been permabanned for abusing a moderator (on a site that has nothing to do with boards.ie)?

berithiel wrote:

.
Yes, this is the official line and you have given us no reason to change our minds.

that's why i thought it was permanent

ShooterSF

From what I can see a topic without much discussion was opened on the 27th, it was closed and made clear the admins were discussing the issue. On the 28th another was open with Helix announcing he was perma-banned, then it kicked off.

I am of course not privvy to any PMs that took place that may change the situation but from the current appearance of the situation Helix's fate was decided before that feedback thread got nasty.

Again, that may not be the case but it is how it looks.

orestes

eagle eye wrote: »

And while you are at it, maybe you might save yourselves hassle and all the rest of us from having to detest somebody and remove GY from the soccer forum. Its what the majority of regular posters there want, I'm certain of that. We just want peace and common sense by the way.

Ta da!

Well done, you have won yourself a small prize, would you like the fake mustache or the miniature mustache comb?

The Sweeper

The Economist wrote: »

You don't need to react instantly. I see no harm whatsoever in letting people air their opinions (obviously moderate the thread to maintain a nice light:heat ratio) and post a genuine "Thank you for your contribution. We'll take it on board." for the first while then, if you really wanted, to respond with a "Okay, but what about...?" later. Neither of these posts commit you to anything, nor require an instantaneous well-guided response.

That technique commits us to one thing that's in generally short supply: time.

As any great leader who has fought a war on two fronts will tell you: it's a bitch. Discussion was closed down - for better or worse - because we were still trying to get our heads around what happened.

It doesn't not help a situation if there is a concurrent feedback thread flaming away in the background - because as we're still deciding what to do with issue number one, a number of other issues can arise on that feedback thread.

Indeed, we bought ourselves some time regarding Helix by temp banning him, and he instigated a number of other issues himself while he was temp banned because he reacted extremely badly to being temporarily banned for something for which he still apparently believes he is blameless and has done no wrong.

As for your criticism of my tone, thank you for your contribution, I'll take it on board.

ShooterSF

On the issue of the modding of the forum. I have never had any problem. Never had a post deleted or given a warning and I am up for banter and I am irrationally emotional when it comes to the subject. I think the guys generally do a good job in a difficult area.
One thing if I may though to use a soccer analogy. Like a certain Man United player, sometimes I feel the forum is a victim of it's reputation. Banter is a dangerous issue in that forum because of a reputation the forum has. I'm sure the mods are aware that people outside of the forum are all too happy to go "soccer forum at it again. Tearing each other's heads off" and have to react quickly.
It's a shame because deep down even though things may be said in the heat of the moment I don't think many, if any, of the regular posters actually hold a real grudge towards another. I actually find the forum, generally, great for the discussion of soccer.
I realise this is mostly off-topic .

Helix

Beruthiel wrote: »

Helix was given a TEMP ban from Soccer while we discussed this.
He was given every opportunity, via PM and Help Desk to dig himself back out of the hole he was in.

you didnt reply to my pms, and my help desk thread was locked. it wasnt until the next day when i was informed i had been permabanned that a help desk thread was allowed to stay open

Beruthiel wrote: »

Since then, Helix did nothing whatsoever to call a halt to this

by doing what? it was requested the league name was changed to remove reference to boards, and it was. it took me asking SIX times to be told the reason for my ban, a reason which has now changed more times than i can remember at this stage

PHB

Beruthiel wrote: »

This is not a precedent.
We have no intention of making this a rule.
If and when this should ever happen again, it will be treated on it's own merit.

Now thats the part I really get confused about.

Simply, if somebody does the same thing on xpert 11 forum, will they be banned?
If I issue a press release on the xpert11 forum, in which I break the soccer forum rules, will it result in a ban?

If the answer to that question is "we'll need to review it", its an entirely new step in boards.ie moderation, where you can be banned for something you didn't know was against the rules.

ShooterSF

PHB wrote: »

Now thats the part I really get confused about.

Simply, if somebody does the same thing on xpert 11 forum, will they be banned?
If I issue a press release on the xpert11 forum, in which I break the soccer forum rules, will it result in a ban?

If the answer to that question is "we'll need to review it", its an entirely new step in boards.ie moderation, where you can be banned for something you didn't know was against the rules.

And a point I raised last night, if boards.ie is protective of it's name then un-official affiliation can surely not be allowed. Purely for name protection reasons.

Otacon

Why has Helix not been site-banned if this is meant to be a sanction for bullying?

It appears more like an act of revenge seeing as it was a Soccer forum ban.

seamus

I'm broadly in agreement with everything Hulla has said in this thread.

Helix wrote: »

aaaaaaaall posted on a different forum

This sums up your attitude over the last week in one line Helix.

Your "press release" was designed to bully someone. Plain and Simple. Like a child (soccer fan in "acting like child" shocker), you thought you could stand outside the school gates with your tongue out at the teachers going, "Nyah nyah nyah, you can't get me". You still see absolutely nothing wrong with what you've done. You cannot see how repeating abuse of someone in a manner intended to be ultra-public and hurtful is the actions of nothing better than a bullying idiot.

It doesn't matter that you didn't personally say these things. You repeated them and you made sure you repeated them in such a way as to be as public as possible.

I don't think there's any precedent here. We have *always* felt it as a duty to protect moderators from receiving abuse simply because of the time which they volunteer on this site. You can dislike someone, you can argue with them, and most moderators will shrug off most direct abuse. But any sustained or malicious attack on a moderator, because of their moderation, will result in action being taken by us. This has always been the case, and will continue to be the case. We've just never had to apply it to off-site abuse before, but we never gave the illusion that the abuse had to be limited to boards.ie.

In addition, people have in the past been banned for repeating abuse said by someone else - e.g. taking a post from a private forum and posting it in public deliberately to abuse the moderator. A person has been banned for that in the past, and we will ban for it in future.

MAJD and Beruthiel have pretty much summed up the thought process on this one. He got banned temporarily while we sorted this problem out, and he freaked out. You know why you freaked out Helix? Because when you were posting that press release, you knew what you were doing was 100% wrong, but in the back of your mind you were thinking, "There's nothing that can be done about this, I'm safe here". When we did something about it, you flipped out and refused to even consider the idea that perhaps we did have some remit in this area.

As I said in private, assuming that you're older than 15, I'm a little worried for your sake that you seem incapable of seeing the wrong you've committed.

mike65

The idea a precedent has not been set is tosh tbh, we all suspect we know what to expect now and I guess the admins will be happy enough if there is worry in the minds of posters that saying anything anytime anywhere thats considered abusive (to mods) could get you a permaban.

Time Magazine

Minesajackdaniels wrote: »

That technique commits us to one thing that's in generally short supply: time.

I don't really buy that. The original thread was locked within seven minutes. How long did you guys discuss this for? Would it have added so much burden to say "Thanks for the comments, please keep this civil, we'll take it on board"?

As any great leader who has fought a war on two fronts will tell you: it's a bitch.

Where did I suggest you fight a second war? The only hint of interaction that I suggested was prefaced with a "...then, if you really wanted, to respond with..."

Discussion was closed down - for better or worse - because we were still trying to get our heads around what happened.

1. I don't buy that. I was told, in person, by an admin, that discussion was closed down because it was presumed I was trying to fight Helix's cause by way of proxy. That's an absolutely crap way to deal with Feedback from an established member who went out of his way to clarify this was not the case;
2. If the above is not true, that you did just shut it down to buy some time, then my point still remains that I think this is a foolish way to go about your business for the reasons outlined above. I'm bringing this to admin attention here because it was suggested I do so. It is of course a collective admin decision to shut down discussion or embrace it and we may well agree to disagree on that point;
3. Not all admins think discussion should have been shut down.

It doesn't not help a situation if there is a concurrent feedback thread flaming away in the background

If you'd rather not have feedback while making your decision, that's your call. Feel free to disregard this suggestion. It seems extremely stupid to me, and that's the thrust of my feedback.

tallaght01

seamus wrote: »

(soccer fan in "acting like child" shocker)

Seamus, I don't disagree with a lot of what you said. But, as an aside, I do wonder why soccer fans have to listen to comments like that above constantly. OK, he was a bit out of line. But how does that reflect on the rest of the 2 billion of us?

When you say things like that, it's just going to make the people who use the forum have less respect for you, and decisions reached by you.

ShooterSF

@ seamus.

Sorry to push this but now we're back to protecting mods off site and not members and the boards name off an "affiliated site" (Ref: Smashy's posts)

I'm not sure if your two opinions differ or if the admins are still deciding what exactly the site's line on this is but it's getting rather confusing where the line is.

The Sweeper

PHB wrote: »

Now thats the part I really get confused about.

Simply, if somebody does the same thing on xpert 11 forum, will they be banned?
If I issue a press release on the xpert11 forum, in which I break the soccer forum rules, will it result in a ban?

If the answer to that question is "we'll need to review it", its an entirely new step in boards.ie moderation, where you can be banned for something you didn't know was against the rules.

Honestly?

Use your common sense.

Don't victimise or character assassinate a recognised boards.ie moderator, using their boards.ie nickname, somewhere the moderator will see it and flag it to the administrators of boards.ie.

Folks, we will not police the entire internet actively looking for naughty things you say about boards.ie moderators and users, and then ban you for those things.

What we will do is assess, on a case by case basis, any complaint brought to us by a user or moderator if they feel they're being victimised in some way on a site where other boards.ie users are likely to recognise them - for instance, because their boards.ie username has been used and the site name boards.ie has also been used.

Mostly, if something is brought to our attention, we will probaby suggest to the complainant that they report the post to the administrators or owners of the website in question, specifically because we're not interested in policing the whole internet.

Guys, you're not anonymous on the internet, and you can be lambasted for what you post - wherever you post it. In all seriousness, digest that fact. People are sacked from their jobs for things they've posted on the internet. Some girl posted that she was bored at work on her facebook site, and her employers read it and decided to solve that problem for her by making her redundant.

You HAVE to own the statements you make, the pictures you post, the accusations you throw around, the information you disseminate. It's silly to assume otherwise and naive to presume that what happens on the internet is only harmless words that won't ever come back to haunt you. The internet has no borders, and so you should never assume your online actions won't be extradited somewhere else for trial and judgment.

We are not setting up rules relating to this incident, because there is no place for a specific rule in relation to this incident.

We are not setting any precedent that does not already stand - not only on boards.ie, but to be honest across the internet generally.

Helix

Minesajackdaniels wrote: »

Indeed, we bought ourselves some time regarding Helix by temp banning him, and he instigated a number of other issues himself while he was temp banned because he reacted extremely badly to being temporarily banned for something for which he still apparently believes he is blameless and has done no wrong.

PM
Banned from Soccer
27-05-2009 20:09 Beruthiel

Helpdesk Thread
Started: 27-05-2009, 21:18
Locked: 27-05-2009, 21:32
Reason: "This is not up for discussion with you right now.

Your access to Soccer has been suspended while we discuss the matter among ourselves.

Give us a couple of days."

PM
Permabanned from Soccer
28-05-2009 13:18 Beruthiel

I made ONE post on the forum, which was locked, between the original banning and the permabanning

orestes

tallaght01 wrote: »

Seamus, I don't disagree with a lot of what you said. But, as an aside, I do wonder why soccer fans have to listen to comments like that above constantly. OK, he was a bit out of line. But how does that reflect on the rest of the 2 billion of us?

When you say things like that, it's just going to make the people who use the forum have less respect for you, and decisions reached by you.

If a lot of soccer fans stop acting like spoilt children, on here and irl, maybe they would get more respect. It's a two-way street

Trojan

The Economist wrote: »

You don't need to react instantly. I see no harm whatsoever in letting people air their opinions (obviously moderate the thread to maintain a nice light:heat ratio) and post a genuine "Thank you for your contribution. We'll take it on board." for the first while then, if you really wanted, to respond with a "Okay, but what about...?" later. Neither of these posts commit you to anything, nor require an instantaneous well-guided response.

Why?

I told The Economist several times in person and on various threads that there would be a public discussion, and given that we're a discussion board website, surely you can take our word that these issues will be opened up at some point.

TE, your reasoning is sound, there are often good reasons we want to keep debate open. However, when we feel it's necessary, why can we not say something like:

guys, we'll talk about this in a day or 2, it's a complex issue, there's bullying and mod vs mod and precedents and all this, it's a bank holiday weekend, we don't want to make mistakes and we want a quorum of admin input, so we'd rather hold off opening public discussion until we figure out what boards.ie should do.

?

TE, I believe you that you think you're seeing the whole picture and that it's a black or white issue. I'm a shades of grey man myself, and without intending to offend, I think you're viewing it only from your perspective. Put yourself in our shoes for a minute, consider all the issues, including - don't forget - the fact that this was a case about abuse, and we're concerned about the discussion become another stream of vitriol and we'd rather not spend our entire bank holiday policing a thread that we were going to open at some point anyway.

--

The reason Helix is permabanned is not his actions on another forum. It's his refusal to acknowledge any fault or blame whatsoever, his hiding behind "they said it, I was only publishing it", and his rules-lawyering. I was arguing for his ban to be temporary for a time, until it became clear to me that all he was interested in doing was using a couple of technicalities to shower abuse on another boards.ie user (never mind whether it's deserved, if they're a mod, etc).

Is it a precedent? I think there's a case to argue both sides, that it is, and that it is not. I don't see it happening again any time soon. Neither had I realised that there was such dispicable abuse being levelled at boards users. Once or twice can be a joke, but when you read that entire thread *none* of the boards members over on that forum look good. I think that if there is a precedent here, it's something around the area of ongoing systematic bullying of boards members on and off boards. I suggest that we (the admins) look at Facebook/Bebo TOS etc to see what they do around the area of bullying. Personally I view it very seriously.

seamus

The Economist wrote: »

[*]I don't buy that. I was told, in person, by an admin, that discussion was closed down because it was presumed I was trying to fight Helix's cause by way of proxy. That's an absolutely crap way to deal with Feedback from an established member who went out of his way to clarify this was not the case;

Things said in the pub are inadmissable as evidence

If you'd rather not have feedback while making your decision, that's your call. Feel free to disregard this suggestion. It seems extremely stupid to me, and that's the thrust of my feedback.

So we need to have a discussion on two fronts? Surely it's better for us to come to our decision and then go to the community saying, "Here's what we came up with, what do you guys think?", rather than having concurrent discussions where our own positions might change from post to post based on a discussion happening elsewhere? I entirely disagree with your assertion that the community needed to be involved first.

tallaght01 wrote: »

But, as an aside, I do wonder why soccer fans have to listen to comments like that above constantly.

Because the soccer community has a problem. The entire community is poisoned by the existence of a not-insignificant minority of people who turn into blithering morons as soon as the word "football" is mentioned.
And everyone else refuses to accept that this problem exists and shrugs it off as "passion" or "team spirit".

tallaght01

orestes wrote: »

If a lot of soccer fans stop acting like spoilt children, on here and irl, maybe they would get more respect. It's a two-way street

Thanks for yet another useful contribution

Helix

seamus wrote: »

any sustained or malicious attack on a moderator, because of their moderation

it was because they were acting to the detriment of the xpert eleven game

ShooterSF

orestes wrote: »

If a lot of soccer fans stop acting like spoilt children, on here and irl, maybe they would get more respect. It's a two-way street

Maybe you could share that fake mustache with eagle eye

Nerin

First off-i feel really really sorry for GY. No one should have to take **** for volunteering to help here.anyone attacking boardsies like this is a coward,plain and simple. Secondly,i feel really sorry for the good soccer users. As usual,they get drowned out by bull**** from people that are loud and unfortunately very noticeable.

I agree a decision needs to be made regarding the boards.ie name. At the end of the day,its the admins name,their site and they should be able to protect it,and those keeping it going,how they see fit. I didn't like seeing a banned boards member being publicly made fun of on a social network boards group. If any of the off site boards groups i belong too (such as the zombie hunters) did anything like this,i'd be shocked and annoyed,and would bring it to the higher ups attention.

That said,this whole thing makes me uneasy,i don't know were the line should be drawn,and i'm glad someone else is making the decision,and listening to our opinions.

As for helix, i don't know the whole story,but he isn't bringing himself across well as this drags out. That doesn't mean i'm for him being perma banned(or temp as it appears to be),but when fighting his case,him and his friends need to cop on and do it right,and conduct themselves properly.
As for people calling for GY to step down-seriously,be quiet. She didn't start this,its not her fault.

As i said,big uneasy and scary decision to be made. Hope it gets sorted,and hope the good soccer users don't suffer.

leninbenjamin

Minesajackdaniels wrote: »

We are not setting any precedent that does not already stand - not only on boards.ie, but to be honest across the internet generally.

ok. so this precedent that's in place, how does it work? if i attack a mod offsite, am i banned from the forums they mod, banned from my favourite forums, banned from the nearest relevant forum to the context of the abuse or what?

I can understand the need to protect GuanYin in this case, but i can't see how a ban from soccer achieves this.

tallaght01

seamus wrote: »

Because the soccer community has a problem. The entire community is poisoned by the existence of a not-insignificant minority of people who turn into blithering morons as soon as the word "football" is mentioned.
And everyone else refuses to accept that this problem exists and shrugs it off as "passion" or "team spirit".

I held a season ticket at sunderland for a long time. 40,000 of us pile into that stadium every week. Never had any bother, I have to say, at any soccer game. There's an element, that are a proper criminal element, who infiltrate soccer matches, or used to, for violent purposes. but your average soccer fan is a normal person.

Most of the people I worked with in the UK and ireland were soccer fans, to some extent. Most of my family and friends are. you see an extreme on the net,as people can hide behind keyboards. But most soccer fans are normal people. It can get a bit heated, just like I can get heated arguing about a work issue, or a politics issue.

But to say there's a problem in the "soccer community" whatever that is, is a bit of a stretch. But I guess it's not really the point of all this.

Just making a point

seamus

ShooterSF wrote: »

Sorry to push this but now we're back to protecting mods off site and not members and the boards name off an "affiliated site" (Ref: Smashy's posts)

I'm not sure if your two opinions differ or if the admins are still deciding what exactly the site's line on this is but it's getting rather confusing where the line is.

There's no line. You need to stop looking for a "rule" to come out of this, because none is forthcoming. This is one of those things which will be considered on a case-by-case basis. If it wasn't under the boards.ie name, that would have lended some weight to Helix's argument.

Helix wrote: »

it was because they were acting to the detriment of the xpert eleven game

Through their moderation on boards.ie.

you see an extreme on the net,as people can hide behind keyboards.

This is actually what I'm referring to. Many very normal people seem to lose all sense of reason when they're reading text on a screen which has anything bad to say about their preferred spectator sport. Soccer fans seem to take this to an extreme.
Look at the cycling forum - they constantly have people coming on and bitching about bikes. Do they go nuts? No. Yes, they get heated, but they inevitably laugh it off. Soccer fans literally go red in the face and as has been illustrated, they hold a grudge over innocuous statements which are completely inconsequential.

Trojan

The Economist wrote: »

I don't buy that. I was told, in person, by an admin, that discussion was closed down because it was presumed I was trying to fight Helix's cause by way of proxy. That's an absolutely crap way to deal with Feedback from an established member who went out of his way to clarify this was not the case;

I said that was the way *I saw it* - at first glance I thought you were probably a shill for his cause, but I was going offline and the thread had been locked so I didn't concern myself with it too much. A bit of context here: this happened a couple of hours before a night out, give us a break, we are human.

TE, I think you're making a serious mountain out of a molehill on this issue, and as the Dragons say, "I'm out".

Helix

Trojan wrote: »

The reason Helix is permabanned is not his actions on another forum. It's his refusal to acknowledge any fault or blame whatsoever

thats about the 4th different reason now ive been told i was banned for

i was permabanned less than a day after i was temp banned, and before i started the helpdesk thread, without being told why in specifics