Hypocritical much??

Jazzy

oh, and do you know what else is hypocritical devore? the fact that the mods and admins here always tell us to use the report post function and go to the powers that be if they see something they dont like / think is wrong.... but someone that is a long term mod here didnt do that on another site and instead had it brought back to here.
that doesnt suit tho... damn. just where should we put all these lines?

DeVore

DeVore wrote: »

What do we do, simply look the other way?

DeV.

1. Temp lock the thread in the Soccer Forum until the Boards name has been removed from the League.

2. Alter your site rules to gain control over your own site name and provide some legal protection for yourselves.

3. Publicly state your dilemma in the Soccer Forum in a manner such as: "While we recognise that this incident occurred on a 3rd party site and is thus beyond our powers; we also recognise that Boards.ie is a community and when one of our posters is attacked we, as a community, should act to protect them; be they poster, mod, cmod or smod. We would appreciate the input of forum members in a Feedback thread we have started"

4. Start the feedback thread, get the input you need and then act based on what is best for the community. That way you can at least say you listened to all the points of view and came to your decision based upon that.


You CANNOT police the internet Dev. You have to accept that, in some instances, you are powerless to act.

_blank_

Deleted User wrote: »

You CANNOT police the internet Dev. You have to accept that, in some instances, you are powerless to act.

In this incident the Admin are not powerless though.

Something they didn't like took place, and they had to power and used it, to punish as they see fit.

mayordenis

Banning some from there league for "acting the gimp" (as they put it) is different to banning someone on this board for something they did elsewhere - also you don't understand irony.

Spud83

Deleted User wrote: »

You CANNOT police the internet Dev. You have to accept that, in some instances, you are powerless to act.

He isn't policing the internet he is policing his site, some will say wrongly or badly.

Policing the Internet would be him going to premierleague.com (for example) and trying to get me banned from that because of something I done here.

Des

Des wrote: »

In this incident the Admin are not powerless though.

Something they didn't like took place, and they had to power and used it, to punish as they see fit.

Indeed. Powerless is perhaps the wrong word.

I am not saying they cannot act as they plainly have.

I am saying they should not act as to do so is a far greater wrong than that perpetrated by Helix.

alanmurphy83

alanmurphy83 wrote: »

He isn't policing the internet he is policing his site, some will say wrongly or badly.

Policing the Internet would be him going to premierleague.com (for example) and trying to get me banned from that because of something I done here.

In this instance I would say wrongly and badly.

However, he is policing the internet as the incident which he is issuing a punishment for took place elsewhere than his website.

DeVore

So you would be happy to tell a moderator "hey, I know you are a volunteer and yes we could take some actions to defend you (vis-a-vis temp, repeat TEMP banning an abusive vulgar bully from your forum), but instead you, the mod, are going to have to suck it up because we are too afraid to act on our own convictions.

My conviction is that what Helix wrote was completely unacceptible and snide bullying. I dont like the precedent but I do believe this is an extremely unusual case that just about gathered enough critical components to support action being taken; ie: prior connection to Boards and use of the Soccer forum for promotion, not to mention using our name and naming the mod inquestion with considerable personal abuse.... yeah, to my mind, thats enough to trip the switch and get you a swift kick in the ass. Its more then enough to get you a box in the jaw in most pubs.

DeV.

_blank_

So it's a Temp Ban then, but was upgraded to a Perm ban because the dude wouldn't admit wrongdoing?

dfx-

Deleted User wrote: »

In this instance I would say wrongly and badly.

However, he is policing the internet as the incident which he is issuing a punishment for took place elsewhere than his website.

It is a censorship based on the content of a private league on a separate independent Swedish site more than capable of dealing with it. People have to watch what they say on Xpert Eleven because of boards.ie. That is policing the internet.

As for the hypocrisy..as far as I searched...no-one has actually been banned from the Xpert league...

DeVore

DeVore wrote: »

So you would be happy to tell a moderator "hey, I know you are a volunteer and yes we could take some actions to defend you (vis-a-vis temp, repeat TEMP banning an abusive vulgar bully from your forum), but instead you, the mod, are going to have to suck it up because we are too afraid to act on our own convictions.

Volunteers get it in the neck regularly and suck it up cause 99% of the time people respect that they are volunteers.

However, that is beside the point.

You stated that you think this is an extremely unusual case but as Ste05 has stated above similar incidents have occurred in other forums. Blogs, promoted on boards, have been used alongside the forum itself to attack members of the forum and it was encouraged by the mods in order to take it away from Boards.

If a row ever occurred at an official Boards beers would the offending parties be banned? That scenario covers all of your criteria mentioned above, as would a few incidents that occurred at the last Poker Forum v Soccer Forum football match.

You have to look to the precedent you are setting and rather than saying "we are going to ignore our own convictions" say, "given the precedent we are setting we think it will do far more harm than good to go down this road and I hope you can accept that."

In no way is this a perfect situation and there is nothing about it that I like but I would not be so quick to act in this manner when it means you have to set such a dangerous precedent.

DSB

DeVore wrote: »

So you would be happy to tell a moderator "hey, I know you are a volunteer and yes we could take some actions to defend you (vis-a-vis temp, repeat TEMP banning an abusive vulgar bully from your forum), but instead you, the mod, are going to have to suck it up because we are too afraid to act on our own convictions.

My conviction is that what Helix wrote was completely unacceptible and snide bullying. I dont like the precedent but I do believe this is an extremely unusual case that just about gathered enough critical components to support action being taken; ie: prior connection to Boards and use of the Soccer forum for promotion, not to mention using our name and naming the mod inquestion with considerable personal abuse.... yeah, to my mind, thats enough to trip the switch and get you a swift kick in the ass. Its more then enough to get you a box in the jaw in most pubs.

DeV.

Doesn't take much to get you a box in the jaw in most pubs to be honest, depends who you go to, like anywhere. Would the person who gave the box in the jaw in the pub get a ban from boards as a matter of interest? Or would that only matter if the person who got a box was a mod?

Jazzy

Des wrote: »

So it's a Temp Ban then, but was upgraded to a Perm ban because the dude wouldn't admit wrongdoing?

pretty much that. the flavour from the mods and admins seems to be "oh he didnt lick our asses after he got banned so we upgraded the ban... because we can. oh and he also deserved the perma ban now that we think about it......."

thing is devore, what if ur 'volunteer' (amazing how we find the best word innit) was acting the ass 'in the pub'? (again, what kind of rowdy places do you frequent?) what then? what if the volunteer had a knack of rubbing ppl up the wrong way? it really is amazing where you put the line. your posting just seems to be easy to thank propaganda that happens to have some weight behind it

Tar.Aldarion

Des wrote: »

In this incident the Admin are not powerless though.

Something they didn't like took place, and they had to power and used it, to punish as they see fit.

Is that not like say the admins being muslim, so the might close down any forum or discussion they do not agree with, say the atheist forum. This is them seeing something don't agree with and extending their will. In both cases they can of course do what they want, they have the admin buttons to press, it is a question of should they. What Kayroo meant(along with other things) was they should be 'powerless' to ban somebody for something off site because they usually express that they are not here to impose their will on us. Who has the real power, us or them. I believe it was mentioned that we do.

DSB

The real hypocricy in here in my eyes anyway, is a site that can fight the good fight against another company trying to shut people up, but the same site tries to censor what is said in other sites out there. And to be honest I'd expect a whole lot less hypocricy from boards.ie an immature poster clearly wanting to take a pop at a mod he doesn't like. Because lets be fair, nothing in Helix's press release was evil or really cruel or personal, he was just taking a pop at a mod he doesn't like on another site.

Hank Scorpio

why is there two threads on the exact same subject. Its splitting the arguement totally

My name is URL

Somebody has to be left butthurt at the end of all of this.

It's obviously going to be the lowest ranking member.

imho, this should be nipped in the bud right now. Undo the ban and ask those involved to come to an amicable agreement on how to proceed

All this input from others is unbalancing what is a fairly straightforward case of playground politics

Boston

DeVore wrote: »

I think if it had not had Boards.ie in the name and had not used the soccer forum to promote itself then I very much doubt the Admins would have an issue with what happened.

It did use us to get started, specifically it used something GY has helped built which is why it feels like a personal kick in the teeth and why we have reacted as we have.

Personally I wouldnt have given a sh*t as theres worse written about me out there but when it is one of our own so to speak, with those facts above taken into account, what are we supposed to do, just sit here and say "yeah, take us for fnckin idiots, abuse away". That isnt going to happen imho.

What do we do, simply look the other way?

DeV.

DeVore wrote: »

So you would be happy to tell a moderator "hey, I know you are a volunteer and yes we could take some actions to defend you (vis-a-vis temp, repeat TEMP banning an abusive vulgar bully from your forum), but instead you, the mod, are going to have to suck it up because we are too afraid to act on our own convictions.

My conviction is that what Helix wrote was completely unacceptible and snide bullying. I dont like the precedent but I do believe this is an extremely unusual case that just about gathered enough critical components to support action being taken; ie: prior connection to Boards and use of the Soccer forum for promotion, not to mention using our name and naming the mod inquestion with considerable personal abuse.... yeah, to my mind, thats enough to trip the switch and get you a swift kick in the ass. Its more then enough to get you a box in the jaw in most pubs.

DeV.

!00% agree with this, its the correct stance. I honestly can't believe some people are arguing that volunteers should take abuse specifically because they volunteer.

Ste05

DeVore wrote: »

So you would be happy to tell a moderator "hey, I know you are a volunteer and yes we could take some actions to defend you (vis-a-vis temp, repeat TEMP banning an abusive vulgar bully from your forum), but instead you, the mod, are going to have to suck it up because we are too afraid to act on our own convictions.

I really didn't want to get into the specifics of this whole thing, but mods should have thicker skin than the usual user. I would be amazed if every single mod hasn't been personally abused here, it should be like water off a ducks back IMO. If it happens on boards ban the person cos it's against the rules, if it happens off boards, (as has happened to me, and no doubt yourself many times :rolleyes:) you just suck it up, take a note, and move on. It's not like RL details were revealed or anything really sinister went on, it was a badly executed joke... (unless of course, the real reason for the ban was the comments on the EP forum, which is an even worse precedent to set!!!!)

DeVore wrote: »

My conviction is that what Helix wrote was completely unacceptible and snide bullying. I dont like the precedent but I do believe this is an extremely unusual case that just about gathered enough critical components to support action being taken; ie: prior connection to Boards and use of the Soccer forum for promotion, not to mention using our name and naming the mod inquestion with considerable personal abuse.... yeah, to my mind, thats enough to trip the switch and get you a swift kick in the ass. Its more then enough to get you a box in the jaw in most pubs.

DeV.

TBH, I don't really care one way or the other about what happens to Helix, (apart from what in my eyes has become a larger case of bullying towards him lately) I personally don't know his posting style apart from in the Xpert 11 thread, where myself and himself had some decent banter due to being in the same league for the last number of months. What I do care about is what this means for the future and the direction this decision will take boards.

TBH, I don't think anything should have been done apart from some PM's being sent out, a quiet word in the ear of various people, this all could have been dealt with quite easily without all this furore and over reaction. Announce a new rule if necessary and enforce it from there on in is one thing, but to make up a new rule for 2 people, apply it retrospectively was wrong IMO, especially one that has huge ramifications for the whole site was crazy IMO. Also, ramifications that apparently weren't considered?? I find this one of the most startling things in this whole fiasco, the second I saw this decision I immediately thought to myself, "OMG! what have they done!!!!!" I think based on the response to the decision, I'm not the only one.

DSB

Boston wrote: »

!00% agree with this, its the correct stance. I honestly can't believe some people are arguing that volunteers should take abuse specifically because they volunteer.

You're talking as if mods are seen as the enemy, and the regular posters want to get at them, in general the soccer mods are excellent, and some of them are my favourite posters on the site. This is just one individual mod who is unpopular with the posters because of her deemed unfair moderation, not because she volunteers. If she were removed as mod and replaced, it wouldn't be a fair assumption to think that the replacement would get the same just because they volunteer for the site. The mod in question became unpopular with the people in question, on her own merits, not that of her status.

Hank Scorpio

DSB wrote: »

You're talking as if mods are seen as the enemy, and the regular posters want to get at them, in general the soccer mods are excellent, and some of them are my favourite posters on the site. This is just one individual mod who is unpopular with the posters because of her deemed unfair moderation, not because she volunteers. If she were removed as mod and replaced, it wouldn't be a fair assumption to think that the replacement would get the same just because they volunteer for the site. The mod in question became unpopular with the people in question, on her own merits, not that of her status.

edit: Just got a warning

I think he meant that volunteers shouldn't be expected to accept abuse as part and parcel of volunteering.

Boston

DSB wrote: »

You're talking as if mods are seen as the enemy, and the regular posters want to get at them, in general the soccer mods are excellent, and some of them are my favourite posters on the site. This is just one individual mod who is unpopular with the posters because of her deemed unfair moderation, not because she volunteers. If she were removed as mod and replaced, it wouldn't be a fair assumption to think that the replacement would get the same just because they volunteer for the site. The mod in question became unpopular with the people in question, on her own merits, not that of her status.

I don't like you so I'm going to abuse you and encourage others to abuse you. Would you ever grow up.

invincibleirish

Boston wrote: »

Would you ever grow up.

Why not ask the same of the Mod who got all upset in the first place when she hunted for incriminating material in the form of puerile humour on other websites and went running to where she could get her revenge?.

Boston

invincibleirish wrote: »

Why not ask the same of the Mod who got all upset in the first place when she hunted for incriminating material in the form of puerile humour on other websites and went running to where she could get her revenge?.

Humour is meant to be funny and as I understand it the moderator uses the forum in question, so there was no hunting.

My name is URL

Boston wrote: »

Humour is meant to be funny and as I understand it the moderator uses the forum in question, so there was no hunting.

If she played the game she new how it worked tbh, and imho shouldn't have followed through with her decision to make it an issue here instead of there