How's our driving...?(forum feedback)

flahavaj

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Look, I'll type it in simpler terms:

- There is roughly a majority and minority group on the forum;
- The majority group don't troll;
- The minority group do troll;
- The majority group get pissed off when they are trolled, as would the vast majority of humans when riled up over a subject they are passionate about;
- The minority group get away with this trolling and then say "ah, you need to grow up and accept my definition of banter children";
- The majority group can't really do that, because achieving excellent control of ones emotions is something most adults spend their lives doing;
- The minority group could very easily stop trolling, but they've no interest in doing so;
- We still want to point the finger at the majority group, and shrug our shoulders that there is no other solution;
- I get confused at that point;


The solution is really simple. Remove the half dozen or so consistent trouble makers from this forum permanently. Cull the minority, and move forward with the majority.

Thanks be to God you are in the minority amongst the other mods in having this opinion.

LuckyLloyd

flahavaj wrote: »

Thanks be to God you are in the minority amongst the other mods in having this opinion.

Am I?

Theresalwaysone

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Not at all! In my opinion, your posting over the last six months has been mostly balanced, erudite and wise (seriously!).

Thanks.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Yeah, I do think football fans are irrational. But I remember what I was like four years ago. I approach not just football, but everything in life differently these days and my temper resides at a level somewhere between comatose and non existent. This isn't the BBV thread, it's the soccer forum with regular people who love soccer. My responsibility is to represent them, not me or you or other poker players - and certainly not the small band of trolls.

People who love soccer will mostly be emotive and irrational. Trying to change that reality is an impossible pipe dream. We need to work with and accept the way people are.

Yeah I accept that, and agree that a non-emotive attitude leads to better decisions in most, if not all, subjects.

Here though, people should stop taking the bait so easily. Especially if they KNOW that the person posting is trolling. There is 0 chance of debating reasonably with them, that person will not be swayed, so whats the point in getting yourself more frustrated and annoyed? Surely ignoring it is the best decision barring the below?

I know you are going to say well why let those here to contribute suffer at the hands of a minority set out to wind people up? Ill say that if people stuck those trolls on ignore, and more people followed suit then the trolls would eventually move/cop on anyway.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I don't think it's impractical. It may be a little too ruthless for some people though.

Yes. Ruthless is a much better description. It wouldnt send out the right message and would likely lead to more messes in the long term where the line between trolling and uncommon opinions becomes more blurred.

flahavaj

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Am I?

If its the common consensus amongst ye then go ahead and do it and stop talking about it.

Lets hear from the other mods on this so.

Do ye all agree with LuckyLoyd that this:

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I would personally ban a couple of posters on both sides of the Utd / Liverpool divide permanently if I had a free reign.

Is what should be done to make the forum a better place?

Or is he in the minority on this point?

Dub13

Here is something that was suggested to me in a complaint PM a few months ago when Iago came on board,the user was basically giving out that because Myself,Iago and therecklessone go to a lot of games and this caused 2 probs.

1)It left the forum 'exposed' on match days.

2)Because we go to games we are not as clued in on the and this is a quote 'majority of fans who are not match going and watch the games in the pub'.

Essentially they were lobbying for a non match going mod who will understand the users of the forum who are in the same situation.I will not comment on this as I am involved/implicated but I will put it out to the floor.

Mr Alan

that complaint is absolute nonsense.

Theresalwaysone

Dub13 wrote: »

1)It left the forum 'exposed' on match days.

2)Because we go to games we are not as clued in on the and this is a quote 'majority of fans who are not match going and watch the games in the pub'.

Essentially they were lobbying for a non match going mod who will understand the users of the forum who are in the same situation.I will not comment on this as I am involved/implicated but I will put it out to the floor.

Ridiculous. Its like reverse logic.

Edit: It actually reads like someone was bitter/annoyed and wanted to find something to complain about.

Boggles

Dub13 wrote: »

Essentially they were lobbying for a non match going mod who will understand the users of the forum who are in the same situation.I will not comment on this as I am involved/implicated but I will put it out to the floor.

Horseshít. IMO.

copacetic

Theresalwaysone wrote: »

It seem that some Liverpool posters feel very aggrieved by the level of "trolling" and "winding up" and are coming in here whinging and complaining about it all the time failing to see that their own fans are guilty of the same offences.

You see this complaint a lot also, and it's rubbish. I've even seen the mods use it as an excuse not to take action, the 'well a liverpool fan kept the off topicness going/encouraged the trolling' excuse. So what? Ban them as well.

I have no idea what goes on in other threads. So if there is man utd, chelsea, spurs superthread and there are liverpool fans or any fans acting like trolls then ban the feckers. In a heartbeat, I'd applaud it.I'm not 'failing to see' it. I just don't see it, I don't know what goes on it other threads My only exposure to it is that there appears to be a group of posters who cross post on their own teams and other teams threads, apparently feeling they should 'hog' the threads constantly with their inane rubbish. For what it's worth if I had the banhammer in my hands right now there are probably 3 liverpool fans I'd permaban straight away and only 2, at most 3 utd fans. (oh, and Des, he just gets on my wick!).

It's not because they are utd fans, it's because they are constant, noisy, trolls, they could be fans of any club for all I care.

I've nothing against any other group of fans, I've a problem with a group of posters that have more interest in winding up other posters and slagging off other teams than they do in their own team. They stand out on the soccer forum as in general most posters are pretty smart and honest/reasonable. They are 365 type posters who hang around boards instead because they get more reaction here as they aren't just the same as everyone else.

It's a small minority that cause 90% of the trouble imo, I'd ban every one of them for 6 months no matter who they support and see how the forum goes.

noodler

What a catch 22 with regards the trolling issue.

If I go into the UTD forum and start riling people up it is easy for me to stay emotionless becasue I don't support them but the utd fans would find it harder.

I guess all we can do is ask fans not to go into the other club forums and make statements they know are only intended to rile. Just have to ask said people to use their best judgement and take them at their word.

Banning some people for posting a picture whilst some of the other stuff goes unpunished may seem harsh but it is sooooo subjective.

Theresalwaysone

copacetic wrote: »

You see this complaint a lot also, and it's rubbish. I've even seen the mods use it as an excuse not to take action, the 'well a liverpool fan kept the off topicness going/encouraged the trolling' excuse. So what? Ban them as well.

I have no idea what goes on in other threads. So if there is man utd, chelsea, spurs superthread and there are liverpool fans or any fans acting like trolls then ban the feckers. In a heartbeat, I'd applaud it.I'm not 'failing to see' it. I just don't see it, I don't know what goes on it other threads My only exposure to it is that there appears to be a group of posters who cross post on their own teams and other teams threads, apparently feeling they should 'hog' the threads constantly with their inane rubbish. For what it's worth if I had the banhammer in my hands right now there are probably 3 liverpool fans I'd permaban straight away and only 2, at most 3 utd fans. (oh, and Des, he just gets on my wick!).

It's not because they are utd fans, it's because they are constant, noisy, trolls, they could be fans of any club for all I care.

I've nothing against any other group of fans, I've a problem with a group of posters that have more interest in winding up other posters and slagging off other teams than they do in their own team. They stand out on the soccer forum as in general most posters are pretty smart and honest/reasonable. They are 365 type posters who hang around boards instead because they get more reaction here as they aren't just the same as everyone else.

It's a small minority that cause 90% of the trouble imo, I'd ban every one of them for 6 months no matter who they support and see how the forum goes.

Well Im convinced.

I guess I was thinking that Liverpool fans/United fans/X fans should take care of their own trolls before they go throwing accusations around.

Course that is pretty naive to think, no one should have to take responsibility for someone elses stupidity.

copacetic

Theresalwaysone wrote: »

Well Im convinced.

I guess I was thinking that Liverpool fans/United fans/X fans should take care of their own trolls before they go throwing accusations around.

Course that is pretty naive to think, no one should have to take responsibility for someone elses stupidity.

God, we can't even get people to ignore the trolls! if we could do that it wouldn't be an issue at all. It'll never happen though, someone always gets dragged into debating with them and then thats another 100 posts on some silly 'fact' that has already been discussed 100s of times.

It's the reason why the 'ignore them and they'll give up' argument on trolls doesn't work on a big forum. On smaller forums they can be ignored and soon get bored when not one person quotes their reply or acknowledges what they have said for weeks. However on the soccer forum there are too many posters to try and get that to work. Although maybe there is a project in there for someone...

therecklessone

flahavaj wrote: »

If its the common consensus amongst ye then go ahead and do it and stop talking about it.

If it was common consensus then it would have been implemented before now.

Trolling in all it's forms has been discussed, and we have differed on how we can and should respond to that.

FWIW I believe that removing a small number of posters permanently would make the forum a better place to post. Do I think we should do that? I'm not sure, and I'd rather we had rules that stopped people from acting the bollox which we could implement without subjective assessment. The problem we all have with interpreting intentions has been highlighted enough times in this thread, there is no need for me to repeat them.

The Muppet wrote:

With respect LLyod the poll shows that there is only a very small minority that have any issues with how the Forum is moderated 13 users of the 131 that have voted so far.

Do you think there are only 13 people who complain about trolling on the soccer forum? Mike65 thinks they should all be banned but voted for less harsh moderation...isn't that contradictory?

copacetic

therecklessone wrote: »

Do you think there are only 13 people who complain about trolling on the soccer forum? Mike65 thinks they should all be banned but voted for less harsh moderation...isn't that contradictory?

I should note that I also seperated out the general; 'you guys are doing a good job and have it about right' poll response from the trollling moderation argument.

The Muppet

therecklessone wrote: »

Do you think there are only 13 people who complain about trolling on the soccer forum? Mike65 thinks they should all be banned but voted for less harsh moderation...isn't that contradictory?

People complain about all sorts as Dub13 has shown above, there's only 13 who want the forum moderated more harsly than it is at the moment. Are you in favor of censoring specific users and if so on what grounds? What criteria will be used to diffentiate between opinion and troll?

therecklessone

The Muppet wrote: »

People complain about all sorts as Dub13 has shown above, there's only 13 who want the forum moderated more harsly than it is at the moment. Are you in favor of censoring specific users?

I've explained myself above, but I'll expand a little. I have no interest in banning people for what they say (other than the usual rules about abuse etc) but I think how a person behaves, and more importantly why a person behaves a certain way is worth looking at.

My preference is to allow users freedom of expression as much as possible, I do not think that deciding to get stricter on trolling is censorship, as it is not based on trying to silence opinion.

elshambo

copacetic wrote: »

I should note that I also seperated out the general; 'you guys are doing a good job and have it about right' poll response from the trollling moderation argument.

Not that it matters but I also voted good job while then posted about hammering the trolls:o

Because generally i think the lads do a good job but should cut out the........

The Muppet

therecklessone wrote: »

I've explained myself above, but I'll expand a little. I have no interest in banning people for what they say (other than the usual rules about abuse etc) but I think how a person behaves, and more importantly why a person behaves a certain way is worth looking at.

My preference is to allow users freedom of expression as much as possible, I do not think that deciding to get stricter on trolling is censorship, as it is not based on trying to silence opinion.

Call it what you like, removing users who state their opinion while posting within the rules ( if that happens) will be censorship. It's a ridiculous suggestion that panders to the minority of users. If users are breaking rules ban them, If they are not breaking an existing rule yet casuing problems create a rule and enforce it.

copacetic

The Muppet wrote: »

Call it what you like, removing users who state their opinion while posting within the rules ( if that happens) will be censorship. It's a ridiculous suggestion that panders to the minority of users. If users are breaking rules ban them, If they are not breaking an existing rule yet casuing problems create a rule and enforce it.

thats the problem with trolling across boards though. The rules are clear, no trolling. The definition and interpretation is the hard thing for mods. One mans incredible troll is another mans great skin only havin a laugh.

5starpool

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Look, I'll type it in simpler terms:

- There is roughly a majority and minority group on the forum;
- The majority group don't troll;
- The minority group do troll;
- The majority group get pissed off when they are trolled, as would the vast majority of humans when riled up over a subject they are passionate about;
- The minority group get away with this trolling and then say "ah, you need to grow up and accept my definition of banter children";
- The majority group can't really do that, because achieving excellent control of ones emotions is something most adults spend their lives doing;
- The minority group could very easily stop trolling, but they've no interest in doing so;
- We still want to point the finger at the majority group, and shrug our shoulders that there is no other solution;
- I get confused at that point;


The solution is really simple. Remove the half dozen or so consistent trouble makers from this forum permanently. Cull the minority, and move forward with the majority.

Fully agree.

The Muppet wrote: »

With respect LLyod the poll shows that there is only a very small minority that have any issues with how the Forum is moderated 13 users of the 131 that have voted so far.

A system that removes people because they express an opinion that deviates from your own is censorship and an abuse of power. From what I know of the owners of this site I doubt they would want to be seen to be censoring users without good reason.

Should the forum be run to suit the minority that get upset over such trivialities?

13 people voted for harsher moderation. I was not 1 of them as this would not represent my views - none of the options did. Harsher on some things, more lenient on others would be, but that was not an option.

flahavaj wrote: »

Thanks be to God you are in the minority amongst the other mods in having this opinion.

Sadly. Instead we'll be here in 12 months having the same discussion again I think. If not here then on feedback.

Theresalwaysone wrote: »

Well Im convinced.

I guess I was thinking that Liverpool fans/United fans/X fans should take care of their own trolls before they go throwing accusations around.

Course that is pretty naive to think, no one should have to take responsibility for someone elses stupidity.

If there are Liverpool fans in the Utd or other threads acting like several utd fans do in the Liverpool thread, pull them out by the roots. I rarely read the utd or other team threads so I wouldn't know.

The Muppet wrote: »

People complain about all sorts as Dub13 has shown above, there's only 13 who want the forum moderated more harsly than it is at the moment. Are you in favor of censoring specific users and if so on what grounds? What criteria will be used to diffentiate between opinion and troll?

Common sense criteria preferably. Even the most 1 eyed fan (but one who genuinely believes what he says 100%) could not come out with some of the things that a small set of posters come out with. Engaging in debate with opposing views is what forums are for in part, but having a totally contrary view every time practically has to be a wind up job a good proportion of the time at least.

The Muppet

5starpool wrote: »

Common sense criteria preferably. Even the most 1 eyed fan (but one who genuinely believes what he says 100%) could not come out with some of the things that a small set of posters come out with. Engaging in debate with opposing views is what forums are for in part, but having a totally contrary view every time practically has to be a wind up job a good proportion of the time at least.

Well we have seen users in this thread argue that another user is trolling for saying cetain players were mediocre, other user were offended by Boggles "big club" comment while other fans including pool ones agreed with him.

One of the mods used the term "perceived trolling" and that's the issue really, some people percive any critism of their team /manager as trolling when that may not be the case at all.

5starpool

The Muppet wrote: »

Well we have seen users in this thread argue that another user is trolling for saying cetain players were mediocre, other user were offended by Boggles "big club" comment while other fans including pool ones agreed with him.

One of the mods used the term "perceived trolling" and that's the issue really, some people percive any critism of their team /manager as trolling when that may not be the case at all.

I agree that it is not something that can be governed by a list of rules, but there are some fairly clear instances of people that are clearly in it for this in my opinion.

Mr.Nice Guy

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The solution is really simple. Remove the half dozen or so consistent trouble makers from this forum permanently. Cull the minority, and move forward with the majority.

Hang on, "cull" people who haven't broken any rules? Seriously? I respect anyone who has to mod this forum as I'd imagine along with After Hours it's probably the toughest one to mod (maybe the toughest) but to me such an idea will only create a whole new set of problems.

5starpool wrote:

I agree that it is not something that can be governed by a list of rules, but there are some fairly clear instances of people that are clearly in it for this in my opinion.

If it can't be governed by a set of rules then surely it shouldn't be a bannable offence. It's not good enough to ban someone for "perceived trolling". If such a rule was in place then mods could get away with banning people for a whole range of factors. Suppose a mod and a user don't get along so the mod bans the user on the grounds of "perceived trolling". That would be perfectly acceptable under such a framework. Imagine the brouhaha that would create in Feedback and Help Desk.

There will be little to no respect between mods and users if such a policy was implemented which wouldn't do the spirit of the forum any good.

The poll results seem to suggest to me that people are happy enough with things and if anything are leaning towards more leniest measures, as opposed to harsher ones. In my opinion zero tolerance isn't needed but rather greater tolerance, to be shown by all users.

I also don't buy into this argument about the forum being too great for users to be able to ignore certain controversial comments. No one is forced to reply to posts or visit threads they find annoying.

As the saying goes if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. Better that than requesting for the kitchen to be given a colder temperature.

copacetic

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

If it can't be governed by a set of rules then surely it shouldn't be a bannable offence. It's not good enough to ban someone for "perceived trolling". If such a rule was in place then mods could get away with banning people for a whole range of factors. Suppose a mod and a user don't get along so the mod bans the user on the grounds of "perceived trolling". That would be perfectly acceptable under such a framework. Imagine the brouhaha that would create in Feedback and Help Desk.

There is no other type of trolling, it's all 'perceived'. Once the mods of a forum agree, then it's trolling. They are the ones that are doing the perceiving. Trolling can be overt or constant low level, adding up over time to a clear pattern of behaviour that mods can act on. The better trolls go for the low level and keep at it as long as they can get away with it. They keep pushing the general user base, looking for reaction, constanly yaking about telling it like it is, how their opinions may be controversial but they are really their opinions etc.

As for the can't stand the heat rubbish, thats what it is, rubbish. However you are kind of correct, there is a choice to be made. Do we want this small 'heat' generating minority to have free reign, constantly staying on the boderline of the trolling rules with practically every post. Or so we crack down on them, expect them to moderate their behaviour and act like adults?

I've no doubt it would generate feedback and help desk heat if there was a crack down, this is what these people live for. As you can see from this thread there is already a fair bit of scurrying around now that the light has been shined on them.

mike65

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I also don't buy into this argument about the forum being too great for users to be able to ignore certain controversial comments. No one is forced to reply to posts or visit threads they find annoying.

This I suspect is what Boggles and yourself (as chief culprits) rely on with regard to the Liverpool superthread. (note Boggles has 265 posts in Liverpool thread and 66 in the Are Liverpool (and Rafa) done for? thread - he has 242 in Man Utd thread)

Mr.Nice Guy

mike65 wrote:

This I suspect is what Boggles and yourself (as chief culprits) rely on with regard to the Liverpool superthread. (note Boggles has 265 posts in Liverpool thread and 66 in the Are Liverpool (and Rafa) done for? thread - he has 242 in Man Utd thread)

Excuse me? I am a chief culprit am I? I believe I have a whopping total of 1 post in the Liverpool superthread. Did you have a problem with that post, mike?

I'm not hear to speak for anyone except myself but I'm surprised I have been perceived as a troll tbh. I don't feel I am and I think this goes back to people being a bit too "precious" to use a phrase someone else used.

copacetic wrote: »

There is no other type of trolling, it's all 'perceived'. Once the mods of a forum agree, then it's trolling. They are the ones that are doing the perceiving. Trolling can be overt or constant low level, adding up over time to a clear pattern of behaviour that mods can act on. The better trolls go for the low level and keep at it as long as they can get away with it. They keep pushing the general user base, looking for reaction, constanly yaking about telling it like it is, how their opinions may be controversial but they are really their opinions etc.

As for the can't stand the heat rubbish, thats what it is, rubbish. However you are kind of correct, there is a choice to be made. Do we want this small 'heat' generating minority to have free reign, constantly staying on the boderline of the trolling rules with practically every post. Or so we crack down on them, expect them to moderate their behaviour and act like adults?

I've no doubt it would generate feedback and help desk heat if there was a crack down, this is what these people live for. As you can see from this thread there is already a fair bit of scurrying around now that the light has been shined on them.

Well mike65 perceives me as a troll which I'm a bit taken aback by, particularly since I am supposedly a chief culprit in his eyes. I would love to see evidence of this as I do not believe I am. I don't believe my posting has a pattern of behaviour that would warrant such an accusation yet in his eyes I am. See what I mean?

Edit: Also I've just checked and I have 4 posts in the "Is Rafa Done thread".

Wow what a rampant little troll I am. Dear oh dear.

copacetic

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Well mike65 perceives me as a troll which I'm a bit taken aback by, particularly since I am supposedly a chief culprit in his eyes. I would love to see evidence of this as I do not believe I am. I don't believe my posting has a pattern of behaviour that would warrant such an accusation yet in his eyes I am. See what I mean?

Edit: Also I've just checked and I have 4 posts in the "Is Rafa Done thread".

Wow what a rampant little troll I am. Dear oh dear.

Mike isn't a mod on soccer, neither am I, but for what it's worth you wouldn't be on my radar much at all. I've taken a reaonably long time away from the forum though. We rely on the mods to to the thankless task on keeping an eye on users and monitoring their history. When you look back at peoples posts patterns quickly become apparent.

Mike thinking you are a troll would't mean any action would be taken, presumably there would have to be an agreement amongst a majority of mods to tag someone as a troll. Just like there is now. I'd personally just like the radar to be adjusted slightly to be more sensitive.

I've seen a fair few posts from people on this thread (not you) who you can already see are very worried that a crack down might happen. They know they have been trolling and are worried. It's as simple as that. Maybe they'll cop on and start acting like normal people? Odds?

LuckyLloyd

copacetic wrote: »

Mike isn't a mod on soccer, neither am I, but for what it's worth you wouldn't be on my radar much at all. I've taken a reaonably long time away from the forum though. We rely on the mods to to the thankless task on keeping an eye on users and monitoring their history. When you look back at peoples posts patterns quickly become apparent.

Mike thinking you are a troll would't mean any action would be taken, presumably there would have to be an agreement amongst a majority of mods to tag someone as a troll. Just like there is now. I'd personally just like the radar to be adjusted slightly to be more sensitive.

I've seen a fair few posts from people on this thread (not you) who you can already see are very worried that a crack down might happen. They know they have been trolling and are worried. It's as simple as that. Maybe they'll cop on and start acting like normal people? Odds?

Long. Also, you're owning this thread.

pickarooney

Personally, I hate the superthreads and the fact the first page is made up of the same threads for months on end. I barely post here any more since that was done.

elshambo

a person who is a frequent poster with more posts in a rivals thread than in his own teams one is shocking dodgy whatever the reason might be imo

5starpool

elshambo wrote: »

a person who is a frequent poster with more posts in a rivals thread than in his own teams one is shocking dodgy whatever the reason might be imo

Not always the case. It is the content and attitude of posts that determine this rather than where people post.

flahavaj

I've got tonnes more posts in the Liverpool threads I'd imagine than the United thread. That shouldn't point to anything alone to be fair. Liverpool have just been extremely topical at the moment, with oftentimes three separate threads at the top of the page. People are free to post in any thread they like within the rules AFAIK?

Also Mr Nice Guy has been singled out here totally unfairly IMO. As far as troublemakers on here go, hes way WAY down the list

Chucky the tree

I see afterhours have a challenge thread for Santa strike force. If we implemented that over here a challenged a few posters not to post in the Liverpool superthread we'd end up raising more money then Bono did during Live Aid tbh.

Lamper.sffc

Iv found the moderators bye and large to be fine. Obviously there are some problems people have with certian decisions(me included) but the guys in general are doing their best. At least its not as bad as a certain site related to the LOI. Keep up the good and thankless work yous are doing when moderating.

Dub13

elshambo wrote: »

a person who is a frequent poster with more posts in a rivals thread than in his own teams one is shocking dodgy whatever the reason might be imo

Not necessarily,I will give you another example.My political views would be left wing,I would read alot of right wing papers/Internet sites as its more challenging to see what the other side is up to.

The Muppet

mike65 wrote: »

This I suspect is what Boggles and yourself (as chief culprits) rely on with regard to the Liverpool superthread. (note Boggles has 265 posts in Liverpool thread and 66 in the Are Liverpool (and Rafa) done for? thread - he has 242 in Man Utd thread)

A perfect example of why the suggestion is unworkable we have a Chief Culptit because he made one post in a thread.

I though this thread was opened to have a discussion to see if things could be improved. I see the point scoring has started with comments of shining lights and people being worried etc , comments like that are unneccessary in the thread. People genuinly engaged in the discussion that should have been welcomed instead of used as an excuse to point score with snide comments.

whatawaster

mike65 wrote: »

This I suspect is what Boggles and yourself (as chief culprits) rely on with regard to the Liverpool superthread. (note Boggles has 265 posts in Liverpool thread and 66 in the Are Liverpool (and Rafa) done for? thread - he has 242 in Man Utd thread)

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Excuse me? I am a chief culprit am I? I believe I have a whopping total of 1 post in the Liverpool superthread. Did you have a problem with that post, mike?

I think it’s a case of mistaking identity here Mike.

5starpool

The Muppet wrote: »

A perfect example of why the suggestion is unworkable we have a Chief Culptit because he made one post in a thread.

I though this thread was opened to have a discussion to see if things could be improved. I see the point scoring has started with comments of shining lights and people being worried etc , comments like that are unneccessary in the thread. People genuinly engaged in the discussion that should have been welcomed instead of used as an excuse to point score with snide comments.

Whether Mike actaully believes MNG is a problem poster or not is irrelevant, because he would never be judged to be so, and since Mike is not a soccer mod his is an opinion that has no official weight (like myself also). The group ofe people who decide this would be the soccer mods based on reported posts and their general reading of threads and perception of who the flaqshpoint posters are in the SF.

As to your second paragraph, are you giving out because people are not welcoming the 'constructive' opinions of those that they perceive to be the source of many of the problems?

The Muppet

5starpool wrote: »

Whether Mike actaully believes MNG is a problem poster or not is irrelevant, because he would never be judged to be so, and since Mike is not a soccer mod his is an opinion that has no official weight (like myself also). The group ofe people who decide this would be the soccer mods based on reported posts and their general reading of threads and perception of who the flaqshpoint posters are in the SF.

As to your second paragraph, are you giving out because people are not welcoming the 'constructive' opinions of those that they perceive to be the source of many of the problems?

It takes two to create a flashpoint, doesn't it. we have already been given examples of the nonsencicle things that a minority of people get upset over. The solution IMO is to tell these poster to ignore comments that irk them.

I'm far from giving out. If those percieved to be the source of a percieved problem engage in a discussion about that percieved problem that engagement should not be seen as an acceptance of guilt on their part.

mike65

Mr.Nice Guy, just to clarify the numbers quoted are all for Boggles.

Johnny Utah

The Muppet wrote: »

Why did you use that term though? you gave the mod reason to ban you, You could have made the points you did without calling him a clown and I doubt you would have been banned.

Clown is a pretty mild term but if it was let slide next time it could be something stronger and so on until we have real abuse being hurled around the place and nobody want's that. People should be able to express themselves in public without resorting to derogatory terms or abuse.

"Pretty mild"?

Get real mate, you have to call a spade a spade. Calling someone a clown isn't derogatory if it is an honest and accurate description.




And besides, as I said before, I have reported other comments which are far more abusive, yet no action was taken, so obviously there is a policy of selective censorship in the soccer forum. Take a look at some of the bile directed towards Dunphy or Stephen Ireland if you want to see some "real abuse".

therecklessone

Bump.

OPENROAD

Any chance the automatic week ban for infractions being reversed, seems very harsh imo.

Chucky the tree

I think people who don't expand on a point should be warned and if it continues banned. Examples:
1. Player Y is ****
2. team X won't win competition Y

On the player thing I think dedicated match threads can be counted as exceptions during the game as people watching might want to vent. Outside of that though general one line statements with effort to back them up are usually done delbritetly to troll or the person is to thick/lazy to type of his reason and having either of those people banned form a discussion forum cant hardly be a bad thing.

K-9

Somebody mentioned it is very hard on Super threads to ignore trolls.

Somebody will reply to the troll and then somebody will reply to the response to the troll, done it myself and then it goes on and on. I know the solution is not to respond but I think that's unrealistic.

You have different posters, regulars, lurkers, newbies who depending on the mood may decide to respond. That is hard to police, warning the trolls should be the easy option.

therecklessone

Bump.

This is your forum, don't miss your chance to have your say.

Necronomicon

I haven't quite kept up with all of this thread, just wondering if there has been any discussion on the infractions = bans debate. I can appreciate that the mods adopted a leaner approach (was it 6 infractions for a ban?) and I can see why it was changed (6 infractions is a lot of muppetry). But I think the reduction to 1 infraction is too far in the other extreme imo. I think, particularly given the forum we're on, 2 yellows = red would be more appropriate.

Johnny Utah

Mods,

Can you tell me if the user heavyballs was banned for comment #66 on this thread:


http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055738282&page=5

he received a yellow card, but I'm not sure if he was banned.

Xavi6

Johnny Utah wrote: »

Mods,

Can you tell me if the user heavyballs was banned for comment #66 on this thread:


http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055738282&page=5

he received a yellow card, but I'm not sure if he was banned.

Can I ask why you need to know and why you didn't just PM one of us which is the procedure when asking about specific modding decisions?

Your post is not feedback in the slightest, unless you have some agenda behind it.

Johnny Utah

Xavi6 wrote: »

Can I ask why you need to know and why you didn't just PM one of us which is the procedure when asking about specific modding decisions?

Your post is not feedback in the slightest, unless you have some agenda behind it.

Okay, here's your feedback: I have pm'd mods in the past, but it's a futile exercise as it only results in an argument going around in circles. No hidden agenda.


I am aware that this is a feedback thread, but I need to know the answer to the question above in order to provide feedback on the possible existence of double standards and bias employed in the soccer forum. Now, can you answer my original question please.