I'm sorry but this is beyond a joke now, rugby forum warning for..well i have no idea

donfers

I just received a warning for "breach of the peace" and I still have absolutely no idea why. I used calm and considered language and just gave an honest analysis without intending to insult or provoke anybody (and i'm not sure how i did)

In all my years using boards and internet forums in general this is honestly the strangest weirdest most inexplicable feedback from a mod i have ever got. From just reading the rugby forum this morning after the game there were numerous posts in various threads with posts that I considered far more inflammatory or aggressive or provocative than the one I received a warning for (i'm still not sure why i got a warning).

I'm afraid to say if this warning is upheld then i'd have to strongly question the integrity of the forum and I certainly won't be using it anymore as I'd feel I could be literally warned for anything i said - no matter what the content was, as honestly i still have zero idea how my fairly innocuous post got a warning, at this stage i'd have to conclude it's not so much what the content of the post is but what your opinion is that leads to the warnings which is a damning inditment of the modding process there

Khannie

Did you contact the mod to ask?

donfers

yes i did contact him

he said there was a warning to leave out the rog v sexton stuff and i didn't so he infracted me


this ignores a few key points

1) i never saw the warning, it was posted on page 1, i added my post on page three, i don't always read the whole way through threads when posting, in this case just the few posts before mine, he didn't add a warning to the thread title

2) pretty damning this - the 9-10 posts that i actually read before mine, most of them mentioned the rog v sexton stuff and none of them were touched by this moderator...why? maybe because those posts were on the sexton side of the debate, mine was on the rog side so bam! i get an infraction so basically his whole principle that there is to be no rog v sexton stuff is bs, it's clear that the problem is that there's to be no rog v sexton stuff only when the poster is sympathetic to rog which is a disgrace

3) this same moderator in the sexton or o'gara in post 49 of that thread highlighted a post saying "rog is a better player than o'gara" post 46 singling it out as an example of what he didn't want, on that same thread in post 29 someone said "he's (sexton) the better all round player"...this didn't seem to bother him at all even though it was exactly the same point from the other side

so apart from highlighting what seems to be a clearcut and indisputable bias in the moderating (i could cite numerous other examples but i don't have time) i'll move on to my individual joke of an infraction

4) i didn't breach any peace, the thread in question was discussion sexton's form, i praised the player in my post, i didn't start any sexton v rog war, but to do any credible analysis of the player's form, it is essential to compare him to his rival which I and many posters before me did, as long as it is done in a civil and considered manner in the context of the game situation and without intent to provoke then i see no reason for a warning


so to conclude, the thread didn't advertise in the title that it had a warning saying there was to be no rog v sexton stuff, i didn't see a warning, my post was fair-minded, civil and praised sexton and i genuinely made no attempt to antagonise supporters of sexton or to provoke a heated debate on the merits of each player, i merely analyed his performance and formin the most recent game i watched in the only context i could

on top of all that we have clear evidence of posters before me (understandably) mentioning sextons form/performance by comparison with o'gara and finally there is clear evidence of this moderator only seeking to moderate the same so-called abuses from one side of the debate (i.e. he moderates those comments sympathetic to o'gara/critical of sexton and ignores the exact same type of posts when the posts are sympathetic to sexton and critical of o'gara)

clearly it seems there are question marks about the integrity of the moderating process and i hope they are made aware of it and it is stamped out........however i am quite skeptical that anything will be done as whenever i raise these issues with the mods they merely fob me off and tell me to take it elsewhere, they obviously are fairly confident that absolutely nothing will be done about this but i think greater efforts should be made to make the rugby forum truly representative of Ireland as a whole rather than a particular province or the perception of a bias shall continue to exist and many users not from that province will simply go elsewhere

Khannie

Let's try to keep it to the point here. This bias business doesn't really cut any mustard with me. This however....

donfers wrote: »

so to conclude, the thread didn't advertise in the title that it had a warning saying there was to be no rog v sexton stuff, i didn't see a warning, my post was fair-minded, civil and praised sexton and i genuinely made no attempt to antagonise supporters of sexton or to provoke a heated debate on the merits of each player, i merely analyed his performance and formin the most recent game i watched in the only context i could

on top of all that we have clear evidence of posters before me (understandably) mentioning sextons form/performance by comparison with o'gara

I generally agree with. I think if you were to be warned then others should have been too so I'm going to remove the card.