Soccer forum. Re: Economist thread.

mayordenis

Thaedydal wrote: »

If he doesn't think what he did is wrong then what will stop him doing it again?

nonsense of the highest order.
What he did however jerkish wasn't against the rules - Helix is not a troublemaker and if you set a rule he won't break it - that should be the end of the story but sadly with the little admin agenda it isn't.

Boston

DeVore once set down a rule stating "Don't be a C unt", what about that one?

invincibleirish

SDooM wrote: »

I know little about what's going on here but you're wandering into whats known on boards as the "mod conspiracy". It's a stereotypical argument often made by trolls et al.

There is a very important debate going on here and you are only weakening your own- potentially viable- arguments by continuing down this vein, IMO.

I'm not talking about a mod conspiracy, i'm just suggesting deference is paid to GYs position as a mod in the SF when clearly a significant portion of the SF users do not have confidence in her abilities. That point has been made by others throughout this thread and is the underlying reason behind Helixs actions and GYs reactions, she didn't ban Helix but she did go out of her way to find out the banter/abuse about her on other websites and 'bring it to the attention' of admins on this.

ntlbell

mayordenis wrote: »

nonsense of the highest order.
What he did however jerkish wasn't against the rules - Helix is not a troublemaker and if you set a rule he won't break it - that should be the end of the story but sadly with the little admin agenda it isn't.

Careful now.

javaboy

mayordenis wrote: »

nonsense of the highest order.
What he did however jerkish wasn't against the rules - Helix is not a troublemaker and if you set a rule he won't break it - that should be the end of the story but sadly with the little admin agenda it isn't.

Ah come on. "Admin agenda"? I disagree with the decision but I can see it's clearly been made with good intentions. There's no secret little admin agenda here.

mayordenis

I seriously can't see how the Admin team as whole unanimously came to a decision that seems to be against what the general populance see as the way forward.
It smacks of in housing - I'm not saying there's some big conspiracy plot just simple looking out for your own, which is human nature, but it's all dickery of the highest order.

Time Magazine

mayordenis wrote: »

I seriously can't see how the Admin team as whole unanimously came to a decision that seems to be against what the general populance see as the way forward.
It smacks of in housing - I'm not saying there's some big conspiracy plot just simple looking out for your own, which is human nature, but it's all dickery of the highest order.

I have been as critical as anyone of the admins' approach to this issue so take my word on it that any suggestion of the admins being dickheads here is a load of nonsense.

Boston

mayordenis wrote: »

I seriously can't see how the Admin team as whole unanimously came to a decision that seems to be against what the general populance see as the way forward.
It smacks of in housing - I'm not saying there's some big conspiracy plot just simple looking out for your own, which is human nature, but it's all dickery of the highest order.

One of your own? GY is a moderator, not an admin. GY has never been endearing to anyone. The problem is that you're not going to get an Admin saying that any moderator should have to put up with the abuse levelled on Xpert 11.

ShooterSF

"If I were the king of the world I'll tell what I'd I do. I'd throw away the cars..."
I mean.... My humble idea of how I would look to resolve this. Take if for what it's worth if you like (and electronic comment not worth the paper it's written on)

Helix's ban reduced or removed (on parole) on the condition that he agrees to respect GY's role as mod of the soccer forum on boards. If he has any issue with her modding, the only on-site comment he makes are in feedback or by pm and only with constructive criticism.

Boards take a serious look at its affiliation with other sites. Perhaps a suggestion to users of theses games like fantasy football, fantasy stock market etc that usernames on those sites are different than at boards and that they keep the ingame discussion off boards and an agreement with whoever runs the set up that referencing boards nick-names is a big no-no in their off site affiliation discussion.
Any topics on the subject on boards should simply be for sign up (if users have to be accepted, a PM to the person running the game with their off-site username would do) and discussion of the games mechanics, tips etc.

As I said just pitching some ideas.

mayordenis

The Economist wrote: »

I have been as critical as anyone of the admins' approach to this issue so take my word on it that any suggestion of the admins being dickheads here is a load of nonsense.

No I won't take your word on it but I do however respect your stance.
In the same way the powers above want helix to bend over and accept his destiny, I believe the admins haven't addressed as single issue and have been to use others peoples terms thrown around in this thread cowardly and acting like dicks.

mayordenis

Boston wrote: »

One of your own? GY is a moderator, not an admin. GY has never been endearing to anyone. The problem is that you're not going to get an Admin saying that any moderator should have to put up with the abuse levelled on Xpert 11.

Cool then she should deal with it through Xpert 11 or just leave the league - is it that hard?

Hey someone's acting the prick - well **** them, I won't play there game - problem solved.

delly

This really seems to be a massive difference of opinion on this incident, so I thought i'd post a link to an occurrence that is kinda similar. Only viewable to mods i'm afraid. http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=52010399

Boston

mayordenis wrote: »

Cool then she should deal with it through Xpert 11 or just leave the league - is it that hard?

Hey someone's acting the prick - well **** them, I won't play there game - problem solved.

Your solutions is that someone should just give into bullying and quit something they otherwise enjoy.

Also, you've some brass neck calling the admins dickheads. Why don't you take your own advice and fuk off if you feel that way.

ShooterSF

mayordenis wrote: »

No I won't take your word on it but I do however respect your stance.
In the same way the powers above want helix to bend over and accept his destiny, I believe the admins haven't addressed as single issue and have been to use others peoples terms thrown around in this thread cowardly and acting like dicks.

I'm frustrated with some of the answers too but you have to see if they're still discussing it maybe they don't want us to be able to quote an opinion that might change. I think it's best until it's done dusted to keep things civil (and to be fair, after that too). You catch more flies etc...

Time Magazine

mayordenis wrote: »

No I won't take your word on it but I do however respect your stance.
In the same way the powers above want helix to bend over and accept his destiny, I believe the admins haven't addressed as single issue and have been to use others peoples terms thrown around in this thread cowardly and acting like dicks.

They're more than entitled to want Helix to bend over. He did something wrong. It's a reasonable point of view that they expect him to apologise. I haven't thought about whether he should be forced to or not, but if I were him I'd have apologised a long time ago for offending people and for making all this crap.

Disagreeing with someone doesn't make you a prick. They have a reasonable, albeit almost polar opposite, view to most. They'll only become dickheads if they reach the conclusion that this is unfair but don't do anything about it imo.

Beruthiel

mayordenis wrote: »

with the little admin agenda it isn't.

And what 'agenda' would that be mayordenis?

tallaght01

delly wrote: »

This really seems to be a massive difference of opinion on this incident, so I thought i'd post a link to an occurrence that is kinda similar. Only viewable to mods i'm afraid. http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=52010399

Booourn :P

mike65

Anyone want to let the prolls in on this nugget?

Time Magazine

mike65 wrote: »

Anyone want to let the prolls in on this nugget?

Private mod forum so don't want to break the rules, but a poster made an abusive comment on a mod's personal blog. The consequences were debated.

Sully

Personally, I think this is only being done because GY has a good working relationship with the admins (probably more so then most mods, including those in busier forums), she is subject to a lot of comments about her moderation, and they didn't want to leave soccer users get away with something they cant do on Boards on another site. So, they banned the chap from soccer and it seems others involved (bar KevIRL who was lucky :P) got a ban also. I don't believe many others would have been so lucky (mods or users).

DeV tried to point out that while some of them are complaining here that they are doing something because of an issue off site, they wanted (note; wanted. They never actually did) to do the same on their own site. That didn't dispel the crowd, because peoples point is that it should never happen (boards getting involved with issues with their mods off site) REGARDLESS of what site. It seems most folk don't care what they wanted to do on their site, because it doesn't involve them. What does involve them is something that happened on Boards which was related to an off site comment. That's the point and nothing else.

Nobody should be banned for comments they make about other Boards folk on another site. It is indeed their own patch to play on and if they want to act that way, let them. There has been plenty of Help Desk threads about the Soccer forum and GY, they got nowhere to the users satisfaction so they took their anger elsewhere as its nit permitted on boards. By then banning them from here because of that, is censoring their opinions and moving away from Freedom of Speech. It has no effect on Boards.ie whatsoever.

Nobody is looking for a "rule book". They just want things done fairly and don't like how things are going. It is after all, the users that make the site tick and give Boards Founders the cash.

The fact that the admins debated whether they wanted the users views in Feedback worries me.

Its not really a matter of whether it was bullying, whether the posters were wrong or right - the issue that is at the heart of this discussion is whether or not someone should be banned for comments made about mods/users not on Boards.ie or a site officially linked with Boards.ie. That's the point.

Personally, I think what was said was horrible. I can partly see why people would be angry but its still horrible and insulting. Its hurtful. But we cant protect everyone and we shouldn't. We have our own site, we don't tolerate it here and rightly so, but we cant tell people to piss off for how they act on a different site. End off tbh. Iv said it a few times, I see why and understand why the Admins acted like they did. I think now, its time to reflect on comments pased by users and decide whether they wish to be firm on this - which will, regardless, set a predcent. Thats not going to be avoided.

mayordenis

Boston wrote: »

Your solutions is that someone should just give into bullying and quit something they otherwise enjoy.

Also, you've some brass neck calling the admins dickheads. Why don't you take your own advice and fuk off if you feel that way.

I didn't call anyone or any group of people Dickheads - let be clear - I was using someone elses argument that I was against from earlier that calling someone a dick and saying they are acting like dicks are differnt things.

Anyway Beruthiel I see it as in housing - that's the agenda I see on this - maybe with a slight bit of zero tollerence on anyone who pisses off soccer mods or pisses off boards but is affiliated with the soccer forum - Helix as I'm sure you all know isn't a dickhead, was adhearing to rules (or the lack thereof) of a game/forum elsewhere on the net - what he was doing was legal where he posted it - you can do what you want I of all people know that but you have no remit chasing down people over something they post elsewhere - none, zero, not any essentially.

ShooterSF

Beruthiel wrote: »

And what 'agenda' would that be mayordenis?

If I may offer something constructive,

There are some very well thought out comments on this topic looking for comment from the admins, I know there are more users than admins here. Mayordenis was already lambasted for that comment by some of said users who are looking for a proper discussion.
Dropping in and picking that comment to reply on is too easy and can only help drag this further off topic. Surely your time would be best served discussing the better points in this topic?

Nevyn

Des it has already been pointed out that if they are using the boardsie name in someway and abusing a boards.ie moderator and are using that mods known boards nick/handle then the admins can and will consider taking action.

mayordenis

Thaedydal wrote: »

Des it has already been pointed out that if they are using the boardsie name in someway and abusing a boards.ie moderator and are using that mods known boards nick/handle then the admins can and will consider taking action.

But it wasn't before hand - retrospective disciplinary action is just unworkable.

tbh

Sully wrote: »

Personally, I think this is only being done because GY has a good working relationship with the admins (probably more so then most mods, including those in busier forums), she is subject to a lot of comments about her moderation, and they didn't want to leave soccer users get away with something they cant do on Boards on another site. So, they banned the chap from soccer and it seems others involved (bar KevIRL who was lucky :P) got a ban also. I don't believe many others would have been so lucky (mods or users).

DeV tried to point out that while some of them are complaining here that they are doing something because of an issue off site, they wanted (note; wanted. They never actually did) to do the same on their own site. That didn't dispel the crowd, because peoples point is that it should never happen (boards getting involved with issues with their mods off site) REGARDLESS of what site. It seems most folk don't care what they wanted to do on their site, because it doesn't involve them. What does involve them is something that happened on Boards which was related to an off site comment. That's the point and nothing else.

Nobody should be banned for comments they make about other Boards folk on another site. It is indeed their own patch to play on and if they want to act that way, let them. There has been plenty of Help Desk threads about the Soccer forum and GY, they got nowhere to the users satisfaction so they took their anger elsewhere as its nit permitted on boards. By then banning them from here because of that, is censoring their opinions and moving away from Freedom of Speech. It has no effect on Boards.ie whatsoever.

Nobody is looking for a "rule book". They just want things done fairly and don't like how things are going. It is after all, the users that make the site tick and give Boards Founders the cash.

The fact that the admins debated whether they wanted the users views in Feedback worries me.

Rules only hinder the people who make them, because then they have to stand over them. If there was a rule specifically banning what helix did, he probably would have done it anyway. The only difference is that if the rule existed, the admins could point to it now, rather than just banning him for being a dick on another site.

It seems quite simple to me. The admins made a call. They decided that if someone wants to be a dick on another forum, then the admins can be a dick here. Just like tallaght01 called it. There it is. To trot out the oft-used line, if you don't like it, then stick to the other forum (wherever that is). Remember, there's no onus on the admins to allow anyone use their site, they can decide to ban anyone for any reason.

The admins are sticking up for a respected mod who got treated badly for her actions on this site, on another site. People took against her on that other site - not because of how she acts there, but because of how she acts here.

Seriously, Why are people surprised?

The question was asked "if it were a regular user, would the banning still happen"? All I can say to that is, if the situation occurs where a regular user slags a boardsie off on another forum, then let the abused appeal to the admins here and see what happens.

I've questioned DeV's decisions before, been quite a pain in the ass about it actually, but I agree with him 100% on this one.

And in fairness sully, when it comes to GY, you're not impartial.

Hobart

mayordenis wrote: »

I seriously can't see how the Admin team as whole unanimously came to a decision that seems to be against what the general populance see as the way forward.
It smacks of in housing - I'm not saying there's some big conspiracy plot just simple looking out for your own, which is human nature, but it's all dickery of the highest order.

Well for one, the constant trotting out of "this is not a precedent" by the admin team, would lead one to believe that not only is there an agenda, but one that has some sort of form behind it. But that's an argument for another thread/day tbh...

I too am with the masses in thinking that this banning was totally over the top, and I think we can all agree that it was at the very least one of 'knee jerkiness' in the highest order. Here we are some days later, and nobody can decide whether the ban was(is) a perm ban, a temp ban or what it is actually for.

At the very most it is for Helix being a complete dick, and that's what his actions would tend most like minded people to say, that he acted the dick.

I never seen the word bullied or bully more mis-used in my life tbh. At the very most this was a case of some sort of contrived social exclusion, and that exclusion or isolation was played out in a format and on a platform that seems to allow that type of thing, *shrug* tbh. That the league was called boards.ie xpert whatever, is a bit of an after-thought, and I would suggest that while the image of boards.ie has to be protected, the league could have been called Joe Bloggs Xpert 11, and the same action would have been taken.

I would also say that not discussing the "victim" of this attack, is a tad ridiculous, as it should lend some weight behind the motivation. If I was the one targeted in this manner, I would like to think that I have thick enough skin to take it, like a mallard would take some clear water being splashed on it's nether regions, the last thing I would do was to go to anybody here crying foul, and looking for action to be taken, but that's just me.

There are tens of thousands of discussion boards around the world discussing everything from soccer to cooking. I have the same username on any I frequent, and I also come across many other boards.ie users with the same or very similar usernames, are we now to watch what we say? What happened to context here?

Again, I think the motivation behind this "attack" is part of the key to it, and while I'm actually against discussing the particulars of this mods behavior in a free for all environment, I do think some people are beginning to wonder why it seems that an inordinate amount of (mainly) soccer posters, have an issue with this particular mod? I'm not saying lets have a free for all feedback style witch hunt, but I think the smoke is sufficiently thick, to warrant a look at the fire.

I'd also like to add that the proliferation of analogies from some corners are totally detracting from the issue at hand, and no number of "what if's" etc... are going to get to the bottom of this, so most people should just shut up and stop trying to come up with scenario's to back up their side of the argument, we've already been told it's a fairly 1 off situation.

Boston

mayordenis wrote: »

I didn't call anyone or any group of people Dickheads - let be clear - I was using someone elses argument that I was against from earlier that calling someone a dick and saying they are acting like dicks are differnt things.

Anyway Beruthiel I see it as in housing - that's the agenda I see on this - maybe with a slight bit of zero tollerence on anyone who pisses off soccer mods or pisses off boards but is affiliated with the soccer forum - Helix as I'm sure you all know isn't a dickhead, was adhearing to rules (or the lack thereof) of a game/forum elsewhere on the net - what he was doing was legal where he posted it - you can do what you want I of all people know that but you have no remit chasing down people over something they post elsewhere - none, zero, not any essentially.

Don't act like a C unt then.

GuanYin

*sigh*

I didn't complain because Helix just called me some names. Anyone and everyone calls me some names. That isn't a problem for me. Helix and the others have called me names in other fora for some times I'm sure, I don't care about that, if they want to be abusive and call me names behind my back, let them. I don't care.

What I do care about is when people seek me out to abuse me. Helix didn't just post abuse, Helix conceived and generated the most abusive thing he thought he could get away with and then sought an arena where he knew I'd read it and posted in my face, all because I warned two guys about abusing each other in the forum (whether a joke or not, we have precedent (seeing as you like the word) for this)

Huge difference between calling someone a name and specifically seeking them out to abuse them.

It's not the same as posting on a blog, it's not the same as commenting in a bar. It's more like deciding in a bar with your friends to head over to another bar to seek someone out to stand on the side of the dancefloor shouting abuse and intimidating them.

THAT in my opinion is wrong and that is why I complained.

Had Helix stayed on that forum I linked and said anything he wanted about me, and I had later found out, I wouldn't care or complain. When he starts devising ways to seek me out.... thats when I complain.

Nevyn

mayordenis wrote: »

But it wasn't before hand - retrospective disciplinary action is just unworkable.

Why?

Seriously why?

I never had a rule in this house about not hiding all the batteries from the xbox 360s controllers when your allotted time is up, but once it was done there was a ruling made and it was considered not 'being fair' ie the equalivant of being a díck and you bet your arse the brat who did it got disciplined.

mayordenis

Boston wrote: »

Don't act like a C unt then.

Give it a rest - Thaedydal also. I would say something similar back but then again there's only to people acting in the above manner in neither of them are me.