Lack of common sense in the soccer forum.

keane2097

pickarooney wrote: »

I don't get it, honestly. Trolling is pretending to hold a certain viewpoint with the sole purpose of getting a reaction. Flaming is openly insulting another poster. How can cheering the team you support fall into either category? If you can't take someone gloating a bit after a win, what are you doing watching sport?

BERBA is a knob, what's the problem?

Quazzie

The Muppet wrote: »

The example used is not trolling imo but it does indicate is how easily offended some users on soccer are.

Thats why I never went the DRP route as I knew thats how it'd be classed. Instead of the mods just standing up and saying that its trolling, low-level so it might just slip under the radar, but its still trolling. Instead I got banned, and he walked away laughing. Hardly fair is it?

_blank_

pickarooney wrote: »

I don't get it, honestly. Trolling is pretending to hold a certain viewpoint with the sole purpose of getting a reaction. Flaming is openly insulting another poster. How can cheering the team you support fall into either category? If you can't take someone gloating a bit after a win, what are you doing watching sport?

Is this aimed at me?

I didn't think that post was particularly trollish, in and of itself, but that's the problem that you seem incapable of grasping, or are being obtuse about on purpose, I ha ven't quite worked out which yet.

NONE of these 3B posts are in and of themselves trollish or flaming, they look like legitimite opinions, they smell like legitimity opinions, and from 99% of other posters, they would be legitimite opinions, and be accepted as such.

This is why Low Level Trolls are

1. Hard to prove

2. Annoying as fck for the mods

3. insidiuous little bastards who sit there with their "opinions" - laughing at the people they rile up, knowing that people like your good self will defend them in Feedback, and everyone else will look like a lunatic for complaining about specific examples. It's not the specifics we are complaining about though, and they know this, and they work this.

I could post ten posts, and you could refute them all, telling me that's his opinion, that's his opinion, that's his opinion and so on, but take all his posts in a thread together, over a number of threads, and a pattern emerges.

Unless you experience these assholes in a forum you moderate, you have no idea of the stress they cause for moderators. It's the same in the Rugby Forum, which I've given upo modding, because the Admins have the same view as you, mostly, and it's annoying as all fúck for an admin to look for proof of low level trolling.

Either you see it going on, or you don't. Proof is not available, because as already noted, single posts are not the proof.

You want proof - go to the user and do a search for all posts by them. Read the posts, all of them.

Quazzie

pickarooney wrote: »

I don't get it, honestly. Trolling is pretending to hold a certain viewpoint with the sole purpose of getting a reaction. Flaming is openly insulting another poster. How can cheering the team you support fall into either category? If you can't take someone gloating a bit after a win, what are you doing watching sport?

So coming onto a match thread with the sole intention of winding up the opposition fans isn't trolling?

For the record. Flaming from WIKI:

Deliberate flaming, as opposed to flaming as a result of emotional discussions, is carried out by individuals known as flamers, who are specifically motivated to incite flaming. These users specialize in flaming and target specific aspects of a controversial conversation, and are usually more subtle than their counterparts.

Remind you of anything?

Gordon

Des wrote: »

Idiots ruining the forum with low-level troll posts, not breaking the rules, but not exactly playing within them either.

I agree. It's boring to read the same old trotted out crap from some people, being a completely immature arse. If they don't like boards and want to constantly be a dick, and not respond to Mods/Admins steers, why don't they just leave.

Overheal

pickarooney wrote: »

I don't get it, honestly. Trolling is pretending to hold a certain viewpoint with the sole purpose of getting a reaction. Flaming is openly insulting another poster.

Since when? I think they both fall under similar headings. No we don't see much flaming here we can agree thats basically inciting other posters with directed insults or attacks. Trolling is anything direct or indirect meant to incite an argument or some sort of other chaos online.

Sports example of trolling: sitting next to a Clare supporter and shouting and cheering in their faces when they're scored against and waving flags in their faces. While you may be a Kildare supporter, your actions are at best the most ignorant kind of thing you can imaginably do that is the most likely to result in getting punched in the face. /example

Other examples include starting a pro-abortion thread in the parenting forum. An anti-semitic thread on a judaism website, or trying to start any thread anywhere about how Kirk was a better captain than Picard.

Thanx 4 The Fish

Damned if we do and damned if we don't

First thing for me, let's get away from calling the Low level trolling rule the Muppet rule. He fell foul of it but the soccer mods had many conversations over many months about him and his behaviour in the forum before he was banned. Were you to look in the soccer mods forum you would also find threads about those other users where we discuss our actions and what we can do about it and how we intend to proceed. As has already been confirmed, the job of banning someone on a low level trolling rap is a hard one and is not done without consultation with CatMods and sometimes even the odd Admin. It is not something we would take lightly as it is an important decision and we have to be solid on it as a group before we proceed with it. I myself have engaged with some of those mentioned on this thread ans asked them to reconsider their posting style and in the immediate aftermath of those messages there is a marked improvement in the standard of posts from those users in our forum. That they may eventually lean towards a more confrontational or "trolly" style after this is a problem but we will endeavour to give people a chance and not just wield the axe when we can. This could be considered using some common sense or showing some leniency, but that seems to be the thing that most people are complaining is not happening.

So now it seems that people only want to see common sense or leniency or whatever it may be disguised as these days applied when they like the outcome of it but when they feel aggrieved somehow they want to push for full and rigorous application of the charter as defined. This has always been one of the problems with moderating in this forum, if you do not like a decision then you can point back to an occasion where another mod infracted or did not and then use that to support your argument. If a mod takes the sometimes more expedient (or common sense, or lenient, or ostriching, depends on your view of the mod who made the decision) route of deleting offending posts then there will more often than not be complaints that the rules were not applied and if the posts that have been in breach of the charter, for whatever reason, are infracted then people will complain that they have received an infraction when it was only a small breach of the charter. Both approaches may be correct and then a mod has to make a call and once interpretation of the laws comes into play then there is another set of criteria (just as in football) including perceived intent, possible ramifications for the forum, the posters past posting history and what other mods think and many of these things can be very subjective and so open to varying results from different mods depending on a number of factors that are not documented in the charter.

Everyone who posts in soccer has agreed to abide by the charter. I can sometimes understand why people are disappointed with decisions made but if a decision is made that is wholly supported by the charter that each user has agreed to and then constantly complains when they are pulled up for breaching that charter then it is too late. Report the post and don't rise to it is something that people have been advised to do for as long as I have been around and yet when users attack another user who they feel is a troll, they feel that it is okay to blame the mods for not banning the alleged culprit. The "heat of the moment" excuse is one that cannot be used, you have to type a response, you have to press submit and all of the time you are composing that post you know you are doing so in direct breach of the charter. So a user deliberately breaks the rules, and yet when they are pulled up on their considered decision to break the rules, it is somehow someone else's fault.

_blank_

Gordon wrote: »

I agree. It's boring to read the same old trotted out crap from some people, being a completely immature arse. If they don't like boards and want to constantly be a dick, and not respond to Mods/Admins steers, why don't they just leave.

You could just be direct, instead of using this passive aggressive crap, you know. I'm a big boy.

What's the part in bold about?

I'm sick of the Admin approach to low-level trolls. The need to "Build a solid case".

Why? Why is a solid case needed today, where two years or more ago a troll was a troll, and if they weren't they were unbanned and everyone got on with it?

It's sickening to me to watch Forums I LOVE being dragged down and down and down by assholes out to ruin everyone's enjoyment, and the mods basically powerless to get rid of them because some Admin wants a "solid case".

There is no trust in the mods any more.

I won't be leaving Boards, thanks very much for your kind offer, every Tuesday I go out proudly wearing the badge of this community over my heart. I fúcking love this place, I hate seeing it being ruined.

Thanx 4 The Fish

Des wrote: »

Why? Why is a solid case needed today, where two years or more ago a troll was a troll, and if they weren't they were unbanned and everyone got on with it?

Because if we didn't then some other fight the powah plank would come along and say that we are just banning for expedience or because someone was posting views contrary to those of other but they were not trolling or whatever and of course the individual who was banned could just call mod bias when they were perm banned rather than the mod team having a reasonable argument to put for the ban and one that had been discussed and reasoned with mods/cmods/admins (or whatever level the conversation stopped).

_blank_

lolz, the most recent Admin input to this thread is two of them thanking the snide passive aggressive post of an ex-admin who still has access to private Admin forums.

Good stuff lads, good stuff.

keane2097

Des wrote: »

lolz, the most recent Admin input to this thread is two of them thanking the snide passive aggressive post of an ex-admin who still has access to private Admin forums.

Good stuff lads, good stuff.

That is pretty pathetic alright.

flahavaj

Des wrote: »

lolz, the most recent Admin input to this thread is two of them thanking the snide passive aggressive post of an ex-admin who still has access to private Admin forums.

Good stuff lads, good stuff.

These threads generally descend into a little Admin thank-fest and nothing ever changes - sh*t mods go on being sh*t mods and sh*t posters go on being sh*t posters.

K-9

Just on the banter thing, one of those posters doesn't really add anything to match threads other than gloating posts, that's the problem. He has a history of it from last season so when he comes back and does it again.....................

It isn't a banter thing, the recent Liverpool United match thread was a bit of a train wreck at times, but nothing too bad and good banter on it. The vast majority of posters on the forum can see banter, that isn't a problem.

The Liverpool superthread is far more pleasurable to read because it's largely absent of posters only seen after they lost and repeating old debates that go on and on and on. The debates that never end was the problem recently in the United match thread, the same point just repeated, wash and repeat and the natives get restless.

Thread bans would make sense, if a posters is posing bother on a thread just warn him not to post again and if he does he's banned. Works on AH and that's a busy forum.

Xavi6

As militant as Des' post may appear, he's spot on. Nothing ever comes of these feedback threads.

Why the Admins are afraid to turf someone out of an internet forum is beyond me. What possible consequences are they afraid of? Or is it just that they couldn't be arsed with the hassle of a re-reg or maybe even a Prison thread?

Thanx 4 The Fish

Thread bans are not technically possible at the moment but we have in the past told users not to post in a thread for a while. A problem with this is that as we do not go about announcing bans as a rule, we have to then keep an eye out on each user who would receive one to ensure that they are not posting there and that level of attention to 2 or 3 or 4 (or however many users may receive it) users over the course of a day/a week is a lot of mod hours a week that in a busy week can be quite a lot of time spent just watching out for one user. Perhaps some method of letting users know on forum so they would now to report would help. Something to be considered.

K-9

Thanx 4 The Fish wrote: »

Thread bans are not technically possible at the moment but we have in the past told users not to post in a thread for a while. A problem with this is that as we do not go about announcing bans as a rule, we have to then keep an eye out on each user who would receive one to ensure that they are not posting there and that level of attention to 2 or 3 or 4 (or however many users may receive it) users over the course of a day/a week is a lot of mod hours a week that in a busy week can be quite a lot of time spent just watching out for one user. Perhaps some method of letting users know on forum so they would now to report would help. Something to be considered.

Users would have to help the mods with reporting, tbh if a poster is causing bother I'd say that shouldn't be a problem. Maybe a list in the soccer mod forum of posters banned from super threads anyway, there wouldn't be that many.

Thanx 4 The Fish

Is something we can look at alright, as you say, it can be a matter of getting the assistance of the forum but some users may not feel too happy about us splashing information about their bans in a place where a user can see. May have to have some discussion with the higher ups.

As for not having too many people banned from a thread at any one time, on a busy week/weekend, I suggest that may not be the case.

therecklessone

Shortly before I lost the head and told a few people to go fúck themselves, one of my final "really fun days" as a soccer mod involved me applying common sense to a situation where two mates were clearly having a laugh with each. The resulting sh1t storm took me four hours to sort out, via PM and Feedback.

I remember it well as it was my birthday that day.

I got Admin support for my decision in fairness.

Des might remember it as he was one of the two people I let off, when the word of the charter and the disaffected masses suggested he should have been infracted.

I don't really care much for the soccer forum these days, I rarely post on boards at all, but I will say this: no moderator should have to wade through that amount of nonsense on a voluntary basis.

Users of the SF need to be aware that when they demand common sense be applied that might mean that the offence that earned one person a yellow/red /ban one week may be treated differently another. In my experience lots of people wanted common sense right up until they fell foul of a rule then they want everybody treated exactly the same.

Fair play to the people who give up their time to mod that forum, I would never take that job on again.

K-9

Thanx 4 The Fish wrote: »

Is something we can look at alright, as you say, it can be a matter of getting the assistance of the forum but some users may not feel too happy about us splashing information about their bans in a place where a user can see. May have to have some discussion with the higher ups.

As for not having too many people banned from a thread at any one time, on a busy week/weekend, I suggest that may not be the case.

Match threads could be a problem alright!

I do think the posters here do appreciate the jobs the mods do and how well they do it, the last internal soccer feedback thread was quiet and posters constantly say they do are doing a great job. That shouldn't have to be reiterated or this thread seen as some slight on the current mods.

It's just some feedback, not the old "get the mods threads" you used to get. The forum isn't as bad as it used to be, the user base has matured for the most part and don't tend to throw strops like the old days!

5starpool

It's not the general modding of the forum that is the issue here, it is some of the smaller things I think. The "don't post about a match when the thread is locked" rule needs to be reworded so that a person not having taken part in the reason it was locked, or not posting about the incident or whatever that got it locked, doesn't fall foul of it. There have been numerous similar incidents that rightly were not infracted, such as when the 'racism' thread (that was clearly only about Suarez/Evra) was locked with a 'do not post on this elsewhere' message, but there were a few posts here and there about it, which was all perfectly fine in context, and rightly not infracted/banned. Rewording and applying that rule with more common sense to actually cut out the stuff that causes the problems would be something that no reasonable poster would argue with I feel.

Also, some of the 'cheap' infractions, like that Warnock one, which I know has been sorted now, should never be an issue. I know that one persons cheap infraction is another persons bugbear, but I think that 95% of the issues in the forum really are caused by only 5% of the posters in the main from what I can see. It is more than the 3 mentioned earlier, but I believe a couple of them are not an issue anymore, so that will help.

Most people's whinging about modding in any forum is irrelevant, as they are wrong, and the soccer forum is no different, but to see decent posters (who I don't always agree with) like blatter and fluffyorganic banned over a tiny minor thing is frustrating.

I know from experience at modding that you can never please all the people, all the time, but you certainly can please the vast majority of them the vast majority of the time. If the rules are the problem, change the wording to target the rules at those who cause trouble or the issues causing trouble. It's not rocket science.

_blank_

The reason seemingly inocuous infractions are so hotly disputed, in my opinion, is because each yellow card goes towards a ban, and if you don't dispute each card as it comes, there's a culture of smart-arsery that allows the "well, why didn't you dispute these at the time" thing to happen.

I've said this in every feedback thread regarding the modding of the soccer forum over the years, modding that place is such a thankless job. For the people who do it they do it by their own accord and put up with absolute ****e doing so. I'd probably go mental personally.

However from what I've read here & in other threads there have been a few instances of harsh bans again recently. Fair enough it was the first time a ban was put in force due to a new part of the charter but I think the length of the initial ban that was giving to Fla should have been reviewed before being put in force as now the damage has been done and it looks bad to most people who have read about it. I think some common sense has to be used when banning certain posters who aren't known for misbehaving and maybe just a warning be given if they haven't done something totally out of order. More time should be put in instead to the small percentage that just troll day in, day out. Everyone knows who these people are & they're the ones that are ruining that forum.

The Muppet

Des wrote: »

you edited this in as I was replying.

It's not nonsense.

It's people finally reacting to months and months of trolling. Idiots ruining the forum with low-level troll posts, not breaking the rules, but not exactly playing within them either.

Like Suarez, gets a tap on the ankle and goes down outside the United box. Usually, in the real world, he wouldn't really fall, but on the pitch he does. He didn't break any rules, but he still gets away with being a little troll at the same time.

And then he does it in nearly every match he plays, until one day he really is fouled badly and the ref doesn't give him a free-kick, because that ref says to him, hmmmm, in all those other games you didn't really cheat or dive, but you did "go down easy", so tihs time, no, feck off, no free kick - and then Poor Suarez starts a whinge after the match or whatever, he doesn't think he's done anything wrong. He hasn't really broken the rules, but he's still managed to piss off a sizeable number of people all the same, by playing on the edge of the rules.

You reap what you sow really, I just wish the mods would harvest earlier - late October, early november, the fruit is usually rotten.

That's an excellent post Des it gets your side of the argument across very well. However i don't think it is a valid argument for all forums here.

I would agree with a zero tolerance in the more serious forums like Politics, Personal issues etc etc but should it be applied across the board especially in the less serious forums like soccer and ah?

I think most people post on the soccer forum for a bit of banter and the crack just like AH, yeah I know there are serious heads in it too who imo take it all way too seriously.

This raises the question who's enjopyment of the forum takes precedence and who is ruining whos enjoyment of the forum enfocing mods to stifle the place with the enforcment of frankly stupid rules.

I look on my particpation on boards as an equivalent to going down the local for a bit of crack (I know there are serious forums too, they are not for me).

If theres a match on in the local the supporters of the losing team are always in for a bit of ribbing. I have never seen a publican, bar anyone for partaking in this ribbing. IMO it's part and parcel of being a soccer supporter , you take the good with the bad, you get ribbed this week, next week you do the ribbing with a bit of luck. I've had a good bit of late from my City supporting friends, it's all part of the game.

That's my opinion it, it differs from yours, which of us are right , who knows? I do know soccer will never be anything other than a bit of fun for me not to be taken seriously.

Bobeagleburger

The Muppet wrote: »

I think most people post on the soccer forum for a bit of banter and the crack just like AH, yeah I know there are serious heads in it too who imo take it all way too seriously.

I'd say the mods jobs are a tad easier now you're gone though

KittyeeTrix

Quick question if that's okay:)

Could anyone tell me if the reduction of the 1 month bans to 1 week bans that were handed out only apply to those who opened dispute resolution threads or are they to be applied to everyone??

Cheers...

flahavaj

fluffyorganic1 wrote: »

Quick question if that's okay:)

Could anyone tell me if the reduction of the 1 month bans to 1 week bans that were handed out only apply to those who opened dispute resolution threads or are they to be applied to everyone??

Cheers...

Was wondering this. Surely everyone's bans should be reduced? The mods are certainly aware of it as trout said in the DRP thread that the socer mods had agreed to it....

KittyeeTrix

flahavaj wrote: »

Was wondering this. Surely everyone's bans should be reduced? The mods are certainly aware of it as trout said in the DRP thread that the socer mods had agreed to it....

Just had a PM from a mod there confirming that my access has been re-instated so happy out.......:)

The Muppet

rarnes1 wrote: »

I'd say the mods jobs are a tad easier now you're gone though

I'd say their in boxes are not as busy as they used to be all right. They do really have a tough job, I won't be back to up their workload again.

The Muppet

The Muppet wrote: »

I'd say their in boxes are not as busy as they used to be all right. They do really have a tough job, I won't be back to up their workload again.

I think it shows just how sad you are that you obviously get such a kick out of creating unnecessary work for people on this site & you put so much time into it to. Who are you trying to entertain/impress apart from yourself?

The Muppet

Deleted User wrote: »

I think it shows just how sad you are that you obviously get such a kick out of creating unnecessary work for people on this site & you put so much time into it to. Who are you trying to entertain/impress apart from yourself?

Meh , I think it's sad that some soccer supporters couldn't handle criticism of their team and reported perfectly appropriate posts, creating unnecessary work for people on this site. Sure thats opinions for you, everyone has them.