Soccer forum. Re: Economist thread.

GLaDOS

K-9 wrote: »

I'm sure they didn't kick her out of the league for no reason. Still, they could have took up any issues over her warning on feedback/helpdesk.

I was under the impression she wasn't actually kicked out of the league, people merely called for KevIRL to kick her out?

DSB

Gummy Panda wrote: »

I'm a bit confused so I tried to put the events into a RL situation

So GY works in lets say a gym. She is also a member of some club. Two lads from the club are complaining about GY's work in the gym to Helix (who is a member of the gym). Helix takes their comments and puts pen to paper. He creates a club memo with the abusive comments about GY. GY sees the memo and is upset.

She tells her managers (admins) about the abusive memo. The managers are not happy about one their staff being abused outside her workplace for her role in the gym. They decide to remove Helix's membership to this particular gym but allow him into the rest of the chain.

Is this the situation?*

Tbh, I don't see a problem with people being accountable for their remarks on other sites in regards to boards. If i went off abusing DeV on other site he visits and use his posts on boards as my material then I would hardly expect him to welcome me with open arms.


*Disclaimer: I may be looking at things in too simple a manner

Lets not compare this to a real life situation, because most real life companies are not encouraging you to have an opinion. Can't compare written text to real life, its so drastically different.

tbh

Gummy Panda wrote: »

So GY works in lets say a gym. She is also a member of some club. Two lads from the club are complaining about GY's work in the gym to Helix (who is a member of the gym). Helix takes their comments and puts pen to paper. He creates a club memo with the abusive comments about GY. GY sees the memo and is upset.

how about this one. I have regular parties at my house, and loads of people are invited. I ask a mate to stick in a room and make sure people don't put their fags out on the floor. One day, we go to a party in someone elses house, and while there, I see someone abusing my mate for telling him not to put his fag out on my carpet. This guy - whom I hardly know - starts dancing around, telling my mate that everyone thinks he's a dickhead.

now, two weeks later, I see this guy at the door of my house, walking in like nothings happened.

What would you do?

Gummy Panda

Gummy Panda wrote: »

Is this the situation?*

No.

GY and Helix are members of site A.

Three others and Helix are also members of site B.

All of them are members of Site C.

The three others comment on Site B that GY should be kicked and make comments about her.

Helix copies and pastes those comments on Site C.

GY reports these comments to the owners and Admins of Site A and Helix is subsequently banned.

Sites A, B and C have absolutely no affiliation whatsoever with one another.

smashey

Deleted User wrote: »

Sites A, B and C have absolutely no affiliation whatsoever with one another.

Apart from the fact that they were using our name.

DSB

tbh wrote: »

how about this one. I have regular parties at my house, and loads of people are invited. I ask a mate to stick in a room and make sure people don't put their fags out on the floor. One day, we go to a party in someone elses house, and while there, I see someone abusing my mate for telling him not to put his fag out on my carpet. This guy - whom I hardly know - starts dancing around, telling my mate that everyone thinks he's a dickhead.

now, two weeks later, I see this guy at the door of my house, walking in like nothings happened.

What would you do?

Why would you compare your house where you're obviously going to restrict entry to specific people you want there, to an internet forum which is there for anyone who is willing to respect the rules.

_blank_

smashey wrote: »

Apart from the fact that they were using our name.

But that didn't seem to be a problem for you last month

The Admin need to make a decision here

either it's ok to use the Boards.ie name on other sites on the internet, or it's not.

Does the Boards.ie Stock Market game have to revise it's workings?

The Fantasy Football?

or is it pick and choose whenever something goes wrong?

humanji

DSB wrote: »

Why would you compare your house where you're obviously going to restrict entry to specific people you want there, to an internet forum which is there for anyone who is willing to respect the rules.

Because this internet forum is a private site. The owners allow whoever they want in under their rules, just like your own home/

smashey

Des wrote: »

But that didn't seem to be a problem for you last month

See MAJD's post on the time frame for all of this and see my post on the reasons we did what we did.

Actually, there are a lot of people posting here now who really should read all posts on this thread.

smashey

smashey wrote: »

Apart from the fact that they were using our name.

By your logic you are willingly taking responsibility for any group using your name. If you can act against those who use your name and use that as a justification for your actions then you are implicitly stating that what goes on under your name is your responsibility. In that case you are opening yourself to a massive amount of legal liability.

Also you have never attempted to restrict the usage of your name AFAIK.

Gummy Panda

Deleted User wrote: »

No.

GY and Helix are members of site A.

Three others and Helix are also members of site B.

All of them are members of Site C.


Sites A, B and C have absolutely no affiliation whatsoever with one another.

Ah. Thats where i got confused.

I thought it was just boards.ie and xpert11. I didn't know there was another site involved as well.

smashey

smashey wrote: »

See MAJD's post on the time frame for all of this and see my post on the reasons we did what we did.

Actually, there are a lot of people posting here now who really should read all posts on this thread.

Actually, you guys need to sit down and re-think this whole issue. You are definitely overlooking some possible legal issues with your current stance.

FWIW if I were an Admin I would immediately move to protect the Boards.ie name. You guys are really making a mess of this.

smashey

Deleted User wrote: »

Actually, you guys need to sit down and re-think this whole issue. You are definitely overlooking some possible legal issues with your current stance.

FWIW if I were an Admin I would immediately move to protect the Boards.ie name. You guys are really making a mess of this.

What do you mean by legal issues?

_blank_

smashey wrote: »

See MAJD's post on the time frame for all of this and see my post on the reasons we did what we did.

Actually, there are a lot of people posting here now who really should read all posts on this thread.

What?

The fact that the Admin are getting antsy about the use of the Boards.ie name elsewhere on the internet is a completely seperate issue to this, but is being used to beat Helix with.

Are you suggesting that if the Xperteleven League hadn't been named with Boards.ie in it's name, then this wouldn't have blown up?

Seriously?

I think the Admin need to start singing from the same hymn sheet on this issue and stop issuing conflicting dictats, because it's very confusing from this point of view.

Very confusing indeed.

_blank_

Be careful what you type there Kayroo. :rolleyes:

DSB

humanji wrote: »

Because this internet forum is a private site. The owners allow whoever they want in under their rules, just like your own home/

If this is the case, and the forum wants to restrict access based on things outside the forum, then they should specify this, and I'll gladly leave, as I'm sure plenty of others would.

However, I suspect you're speaking for the forum, when you've no position to do so.

smashey

smashey wrote: »

What do you mean by legal issues?

If you claim to be responsible for actions that take place under your name even when no explicit permission has been given for its use by the site then you are opening yourselves to civil liabilities for actions that occur under the banner of the Boards name.

Were I Boards.ie I would immediately alter the rules on the use of the name because if you can punish based on the name linking you to another site then you can be punished imo. Certainly it is arguable.

Thanx 4 The Fish

Deleted User wrote: »

If you claim to be responsible for actions that take place under your name even when no explicit permission has been given for its use by the site then you are opening yourselves to civil liabilities for actions that occur under the banner of the Boards name.

Were I Boards.ie I would immediately alter the rules on the use of the name because if you can punish based on the name linking you to another site then you can be punished imo. Certainly it is arguable.

I doubt you are right.

So Liverpool FC allow the Irish branch to run a supporters club. The Irish branch smash up a bunch of shops in Dublin while on a LFC Irish supporters do. Liverpool FC face sanction?

I don't see it myself.

humanji

DSB wrote: »

If this is the case, and the forum wants to restrict access based on things outside the forum, then they should specify this, and I'll gladly leave, as I'm sure plenty of others would.

However, I suspect you're speaking for the forum, when you've no position to do so.

I'm jsut pointing out that the owners of the site can do whatever the hell they want, because they own it. If this involves punishing someone for bullying, then so be it.

Chong

Please FFS sake put an end to this thread, make a ruling and stand by it.

Its gone on 592 posts too long.

The post that summed this up so well was "This is great big ball of Sh!te", I am too lazy to find it but they were right.

To quote my good man Charlie on the Newcastle thread in Soccer forum, this thread too can be summed by the following image:

Thanx 4 The Fish

Thanx 4 The Fish wrote: »

I doubt you are right.

So Liverpool FC allow the Irish branch to run a supporters club. The Irish branch smash up a bunch of shops in Dublin while on a LFC Irish supporters do. Liverpool FC face sanction?

I don't see it myself.

Liverpool FC don't discipline the members. Liverpool FC are not responsible for the actions of the members and make no claim to be. They own the name Liverpool FC and allow other groups to utilise it while indemnifying themselves. This is EXACTLY what I am suggesting Boards.ie do.

If Liverpool were directly involved in the supporters club they would be held responsible; such as happens when the fans who travel with a club misbehave in some way.

If Boards are going to get involved with disciplining members for actions outside their own remit then they are taking responsibility for them. This can create a liability.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

DSB

humanji wrote: »

I'm jsut pointing out that the owners of the site can do whatever the hell they want, because they own it. If this involves punishing someone for bullying, then so be it.

No, you didn't say they can do it, you said they do it, theres a massive difference. This debate certainly isn't about whether they can do it, its about whether they are willing to do it, and I think if it was as clear cut they do as you made out, then half the people posting wouldn't even bother.

Hank Scorpio

Just remove the bloody ban and admit a mistake was made

There was nothing in any charter about this so no rule was broken

copacetic

smashey wrote: »

See MAJD's post on the time frame for all of this and see my post on the reasons we did what we did.

Actually, there are a lot of people posting here now who really should read all posts on this thread.

Reading all the posts won't make anyone any the wiser. Even just reading the posts from admins leaves you with plenty of confusion as there is mixed messages and conflicting reasons given imo.

tbh

nuxxx wrote: »

Just remove the bloody ban and admit a mistake was made

There was nothing in any charter about this so no rule was broken

see sully? this is exactly the type of sh1te I was talking about when I said that the only thing written rules do is bind the people who implement them.

(I know you weren't suggesting a rule, but my point is still valid )

Villain

Sweet jesus thats a hard read and I'm still not sure what exactly got him banned, was it just for acting the c*nt?

If someone attacks a poster or boards.ie on a blog do they get a perm ban now?

ntlbell

Villain wrote: »

Sweet jesus thats a hard read and I'm still not sure what exactly got him banned, was it just for acting the c*nt?

If someone attacks a poster or boards.ie on a blog do they get a perm ban now?

the perma ban was for not showing any remorse or accepting any responsibility for what he did

which tbh is outrageous and out right nonsense and I'm really surprised by it.

Daysha

500+ posts and this is the most puzzling aspect of it:

Abusing a boards.ie mod on a different forum = Temporary ban
Starting help desk threads, refusing to acknowledge any wrong doing and not given admins sufficient time to discuss the issue = Permanent ban

Am I the only one that sees a serious flaw with this?

DSB

ntlbell wrote: »

the perma ban was for not showing any remorse or accepting any responsibility for what he did

which tbh is outrageous and out right nonsense and I'm really surprised by it.

Why exactly? Have you read the press release? Its hardly character destroying stuff to be honest. He took a dig at her no doubt, but if he doesn't like her why should he show remorse for taking a dig that really wasn't that bad. People say bitchy things at people they don't like all the time.