Forum Feedback (Please thank this post so we know you have seen it)

GreeBo

Ilik Urgee wrote: »

Ok, that's my last in this forum. Another bloody click. Over and out.

tbh that really just smacks of "I'm not getting what I want, so I'm going home!"
If you are unwilling or unable to make your point without resorting to posts like above, perhaps internet forums are not best suited to you.

In life and especially on the internet, you are never going to get everyone agreeing with your opinion, accusing those who disagree with you is laughably way off the mark; to suggest that ajcurry and myself are in a clique is comedy gold!

charlieIRL

christ i go and install a new router at home and come back to this! Relax guys!

P_1

Just a suggestion on the betting disagreement. Over on the rugby forum there's a thread just for betting. Would something like that not work here?

GreeBo

redzerdrog wrote: »

I would agree with this and would be good if the european tour thread would take off as it is even less likely that a thread set up for the medeira open for example would gather much interest but lads might make passing comment if the "epic" thread was in use

There is nothing in the charter to stop anyone from creating a specific tournament thread, the fact that rarely anyone bothers showed that maybe an epic thread would work. I agree its a pity that the Euro one has died a bit, I guess that tour just isnt as exciting or watchable...

redzerdrog wrote: »

I disagree with this as I think it does require a change to the current rule as it is very borderline what is allowed regarding gambling talk. While it says in theory that you can mention it, in reality it is frowned upon and people would be in danger of picking up stupid infractions.

tbh its not borderline at all.
If your post is purely about betting you are breaching the charter...it cant really be simpler imo...

redzerdrog wrote: »

Personally I don't post here as much as i'd like to. Mostly because I feel it is too rigidly moderated and I end up picking up needless infractions for stupid things such as asking a question involving golf in the off topic thread. Silly little things that would only require an in thread message rather than infractions.

The offtopic thread is specifically for non golf topics.
The thread contains numerous warnings and there is a pretty good clue in the name of the thread; honestly do you not think that we have more to be doing than warning someone who clearly knows better?

What you see as a needless, one-of infraction/warning is actually us attempting to stop a crap load of work form developing. You only see your infraction, we are the ones who see the other 10 that we have had to give out for stupid reasons that same day/hour. Please try to appreciate this.
Its the same reason why we react strongly to users who cross the "banter" line, without the benefit of tone these things quickly get out of hand and descend into chaos, often requiring multiple banings when an initial infraction can prevent it all.

We want you to post here more and contribute to the thread...we want everyone to do that!

PARlance

charlieIRL wrote: »

christ i go and install a new router at home and come back to this! Relax guys!

Ah.... you didn't miss much, Greebo announced he's opening an online bookies, EPIC Bookies.
Infractions can now be cashed in for a fiver free bet.
Bets can be placed by PM or on whatever thread you want

Apart for that, it's be an "not at all epic" day.

Almaviva

GreeBo wrote: »

to suggest that ajcurry and myself are in a clique is comedy gold!

So thats what he meant. And I thought I was missing a joke about a cleek - as in, a good old 1 iron.

redzerdrog

GreeBo wrote: »

tbh its not borderline at all.
If your post is purely about betting you are breaching the charter...it cant really be simpler imo...

This why I think a change is needed while I understand people dont want to see posts like this

I have backed
woods @2/1
phil @20/1
donald @25/1
etc etc

I do think post such as I think Dicky pride is overpriced this week at 200/1 he has decent course form and lives in the area etc. should be allowed and although the overall point of the post is gambling based I feel it would add to the overall discussion in the forum.

SnowDrifts

GreeBo wrote: »

tbh I dont see this as changing the current rule.
The rule is that you cannot make posts that are purely about betting, but there is no problem mentionning that you have a bet on someone as part of your post...is this what you mean or something else?

The part from the charter highlighted below is what I consider to be too much. If I made the following post, it would be in breach of the charter which I think is a shame because it would be the exact conversation had on 1st fairways up and down the country most Sunday mornings...

"Cabrera really is playing well. I have an each way bet at 100/1 so I just hope he can bring it home in the top 6."

Betting
Do no make posts that are purely around betting/odds. Either take it to the Gambling forum or, if one exists the associated betting thread in the golf forum for that event. Likewise do not make non betting related posts in the betting thread.
Its fine to make a comment on a bet you had on someone etc but this must not be the main purpose of your post.
Infractions will be given for breaches of this rule. Blatant attempts to ignore or circumvent this rule will result in a 1 month ban.
Under no circumstances should any poster offer a bet to any other poster. Immediate 1 month ban will result.
Warning will be given at the moderators discretion.

GreeBo wrote: »

The issue with a poll is that it implies the result of the poll will be implemented, this isnt always the case as we, as moderators, have the health of the forum to think of, this can sometimes be contrary to what the populous wants (or thinks they want)
If it drives more work for mods then its probably not going to happen.
It would be disingenuous for us to provide a poll if we are not going to act purely on the poll outcome.

That is a valid point but it could be made clear that the poll is merely a persuasive tool in order to gauge the viewpoint of the majority in order to help guide the mods as to what the right course of action should be.

GreeBo

redzerdrog wrote: »

This why I think a change is needed while I understand people dont want to see posts like this



I do think post such as I think Dicky pride is overpriced this week at 200/1 he has decent course form and lives in the area etc. should be allowed and although the overall point of the post is gambling based I feel it would add to the overall discussion in the forum.

For me thats the wrong side of the line and the reason for this is that if you have no interest in betting/gambling then you have no interest in that post.
I know this is an emotive issue for you as you are into your gambling, but you have to respect that many, many people on here are not, they are golfers first and foremost.

The other issue is that if you allow a post like your example, then its very difficult to draw the line of whats allowed and what isnt.
The decision taken is to ensure that the user who wants to read about golf gets something to read about in every post, after all its the golf forum.

Make any more sense?

GreeBo

SnowDrifts wrote: »

The part from the charter highlighted below is what I consider to be too much. If I made the following post, it would be in breach of the charter which I think is a shame because it would be the exact conversation had on 1st fairways up and down the country most Sunday mornings...

"Cabrera really is playing well. I have an each way bet at 100/1 so I just hope he can bring it home in the top 6."

The critical difference that I see here is that your mates are interested in this, the majority of posters here are probably not as your bet means nothing to them. If however you put something with some golf context in your post then by all means add your own bet as a tagline, that way everyone gets something from the post.

Previously we had tournament threads that got besieged by people who had little interest in golf other than betting, dropping in and filling post after post with their bets and what they reckon are good/bad odds.

SnowDrifts wrote: »

That is a valid point but it could be made clear that the poll is merely a persuasive tool in order to gauge the viewpoint of the majority in order to help guide the mods as to what the right course of action should be.

Thats certainly an option and we tried it for the gambling super thread, but there was a marked lack of interest in the numbers voting compared to the original poll, I can only believe that this is because people dont typically vote if there isnt going to be an outcome, but happy to be corrected?

GetInTheHole!

GreeBo wrote: »

tbh that really just smacks of "I'm not getting what I want, so I'm going home!"
If you are unwilling or unable to make your point without resorting to posts like above, perhaps internet forums are not best suited to you.

In life and especially on the internet, you are never going to get everyone agreeing with your opinion, accusing those who disagree with you is laughably way off the mark; to suggest that ajcurry and myself are in a clique is comedy gold!

Numerous people tried to make their points here today Greebo - yet in all cases you resorted to your automatic form of condescending authoritarian tones.

The almost laughable thing about this thread is that every accusation you make at those who disagree with you about only seeing their side of the argument is more applicable to you than anyone else.

As for the deleting of posts here earlier - well in my opinion that was childish and ridiculous behaviour for a so-called moderator of this forum.

Your earlier quote in this thread saying "contrary to what the populous wants (or thinks they want)" - smacks of downright smugness and is as far removed from what a mod should behave like as I can imagine.


You can infract me or whatever else gives you your kicks for this.
Unfortunately today has simply confirmed what I have been suspecting for some time - that you are pretty much the worst thing about this forum and you are in no small way accountable for it's decline.

I, like some others here today have had a enough of your cringeworthy, opinionated, one-sided and above all else hypocritcial self-righteousness.

This will be my last post here until the clearly most required change is made.

I would say that I hope the view is nice up there from your high horse Greebo but in actual fact I hope you have a swift fall off that perch.

All the best to everybody else - it was nice to be able to contribute over the past 2 years. Good luck - I think you will all need it.

redzerdrog

GreeBo wrote: »

For me thats the wrong side of the line and the reason for this is that if you have no interest in betting/gambling then you have no interest in that post.
I know this is an emotive issue for you as you are into your gambling, but you have to respect that many, many people on here are not, they are golfers first and foremost.

The other issue is that if you allow a post like your example, then its very difficult to draw the line of whats allowed and what isnt.
The decision taken is to ensure that the user who wants to read about golf gets something to read about in every post, after all its the golf forum.

Make any more sense?

I know that it is viewed as the wrong side of the line for you and it is not what a lot of people want but on the other side a lot of people would like it, if i remember correctly the last time there was a discussion/poll on the issue the majority were in favor of allowing such posts

Almaviva

SnowDrifts wrote: »

"Cabrera really is playing well. I have an each way bet at 100/1 so I just hope he can bring it home in the top 6."

Cant support that as a valid post. The thrust of it is your bet. And the real problem is that it tends too easily to head off into :

Poster1 : Got him at 80/1
Poster2 : Cabrera always bad value on that course. Back him on tough courses and you have a better chance.
Poster 3 : Agree with poster two. Took him for a place though.
Poster 4 : That the problem with Paddy Power poster 1, much better at...
etc
etc.


The topic was the Irish Open guys. The above is joist noise in that context for those of us who dont follow gambling.

GreeBo

redzerdrog wrote: »

I know that it is viewed as the wrong side of the line for you and it is not what a lot of people want but on the other side a lot of people would like it, if i remember correctly the last time there was a discussion/poll on the issue the majority were in favor of allowing such posts

So this is the problem with a poll.
If we followed the poll results blindly I believe we wouldnt be doing our jobs as mods.

Allowing unmoderated betting/gambling posts would result in driving some users away.
Reaching a compromise would seem to be the best way to satisfy both parties and keep the most users participating on the forum.

Remember its a golf forum, our purpose is to talk about golf first and foremost.

There is a betting forum with many threads dedicated to posting about golf betting (that you are the key poster on) thats where pure gambling posts belong as the are not of interest to all golfers.

PARlance

Almaviva wrote: »

So thats what he meant. And I thought I was missing a joke about a cleek - as in, a good old 1 iron.

Spare a thought for me.
I thought we were in the couple zone but going by what Greebo said about the suggestion of us being a clique being laughable, I don't even know if we're in the friends zone now....

While I didn't agree with Iliks argument or leaving, he was much more than just a superb username, a great poster too and sad to see him go.

Almaviva

ajcurry123 wrote: »

Spare a thought for me.
I thought we were in the couple zone but going by what Greebo said about the suggestion of us being a clique being laughable, I don't even know if we're in the friends zone now....

While I didn't agree with Iliks argument or leaving, he was much more than just a superb username, a great poster too and sad to see him go.

I liked the cut of his gee too. Hopefully will return.

charlieIRL

GreeBo wrote: »

Previously we had tournament threads that got besieged by people who had little interest in golf other than betting, dropping in and filling post after post with their bets and what they reckon are good/bad odds.

And this is something i had the issue with, I was the one against the betting in the golf forum but agreed to relax a bit on it. This is a golf forum, lads coming in an the only contribution was about a bet and nothing else annoyed me.

charlieIRL

Almaviva wrote: »

I liked the cut of his gee too. Hopefully will return.

hopefully, have met the chap a few times, very nice fella.

redzerdrog

Almaviva wrote: »

Cant support that as a valid post. The thrust of it is your bet. And the real problem is that it tends too easily to head off into :

Poster1 : Got him at 80/1
Poster2 : Cabrera always bad value on that course. Back him on tough courses and you have a better chance.
Poster 3 : Agree with poster two. Took him for a place though.
Poster 4 : That the problem with Paddy Power poster 1, much better at...
etc
etc.


The topic was the Irish Open guys. The above is joist noise in that context for those of us who dont follow gambling.

For me I got some valuable information from poster 2 above as he states that cabrera is better suited to difficult tracks were scoring is more difficult as he may not score low enough to compete here.

For me the below causes more noise tbh (not having a go aj just using it as an example)

ajcurry123 wrote: »

Spare a thought for me.
I thought we were in the couple zone but going by what Greebo said about the suggestion of us being a clique being laughable, I don't even know if we're in the friends zone now....

While I didn't agree with Iliks argument or leaving, he was much more than just a superb username, a great poster too and sad to see him go.

mag

GetInTheHole! wrote: »

Numerous people tried to make their points here today Greebo - yet in all cases you resorted to your automatic form of condescending authoritarian tones.

The almost laughable thing about this thread is that every accusation you make at those who disagree with you about only seeing their side of the argument is more applicable to you than anyone else.

As for the deleting of posts here earlier - well in my opinion that was childish and ridiculous behaviour for a so-called moderator of this forum.

Your earlier quote in this thread saying "contrary to what the populous wants (or thinks they want)" - smacks of downright smugness and is as far removed from what a mod should behave like as I can imagine.


You can infract me or whatever else gives you your kicks for this.
Unfortunately today has simply confirmed what I have been suspecting for some time - that you are pretty much the worst thing about this forum and you are in no small way accountable for it's decline.

I, like some others here today have had a enough of your cringeworthy, opinionated, one-sided and above all else hypocritcial self-righteousness.

100% agree.

GreeBo

redzerdrog wrote: »

For me I got some valuable information from poster 2 above as he states that cabrera is better suited to difficult tracks were scoring is more difficult as he may not score low enough to compete here.

More interesting to you as a golfer or a gambler?
Thats the point imo.

redzerdrog wrote: »

For me the below causes more noise tbh (not having a go aj just using it as an example)

Its a feedback thread though...

PARlance

redzerdrog wrote: »

For me the below causes more noise tbh (not having a go aj just using it as an example)

No hassle but I'm not sure I get you, noise as in what exactly?

The jokey first part or the bit about Ilik?
Or both?

redzerdrog

GreeBo wrote: »

More interesting to you as a golfer or a gambler?
Thats the point imo.

Both to be honest, I have an interest in both but I think sport in general goes hand in hand with betting/odds of winning. Sport needs underdogs and overwhelming favorites and adds the the spectacle of sport, in a major a playoff win for 999/1 Alan Dunbar over 2/1 shot Tiger Woods would be more interesting/generate more opinion than say two evenly matched players like justin rose and luke donald.

GreeBo

GetInTheHole! wrote: »

Numerous people tried to make their points here today Greebo - yet in all cases you resorted to your automatic form of condescending authoritarian tones.

The almost laughable thing about this thread is that every accusation you make at those who disagree with you about only seeing their side of the argument is more applicable to you than anyone else.

I dont see how disagreeing with someone is condescending or being authoritian. The fact that I am an authority on here (as a mod) I believe causes some people to view anything and everything I saw through a certain shade of glasses.
I think that these threads would be much more constructive for everyone if more people engaged in normal debates on topics (such as SnowDrifts, redzreog have shown) rather than the toys out of the pram approach. Perhaps its an age thing?

GetInTheHole! wrote: »

As for the deleting of posts here earlier - well in my opinion that was childish and ridiculous behaviour for a so-called moderator of this forum.

tbf you have no idea of the history or what has been happening behind the scenes with this particular poster.
Mister Sifter has been banned from 3 months due to a combination of continued trolling and personal abuse to other posters, abusive PM's and racking up an unacceptable number of infractions from various mods, despite numerous requests to try to prevent this result.
The posts were deleted as the decision to ban him had already been made, he had been notified and was attempting to derail yet another thread.

GetInTheHole! wrote: »

Your earlier quote in this thread saying "contrary to what the populous wants (or thinks they want)" - smacks of downright smugness and is as far removed from what a mod should behave like as I can imagine.

Its not smugness, its experience gained from running an internet forum for numerous years.

GetInTheHole! wrote: »

You can infract me or whatever else gives you your kicks for this.
Unfortunately today has simply confirmed what I have been suspecting for some time - that you are pretty much the worst thing about this forum and you are in no small way accountable for it's decline.

I, like some others here today have had a enough of your cringeworthy, opinionated, one-sided and above all else hypocritcial self-righteousness.

This will be my last post here until the clearly most required change is made.

I would say that I hope the view is nice up there from your high horse Greebo but in actual fact I hope you have a swift fall off that perch.

All the best to everybody else - it was nice to be able to contribute over the past 2 years. Good luck - I think you will all need it.

Why would I infract you for voicing an opinion? Again, try to read moderators posts without automatically assuming the worst of intentions before you read the actual words and meaning of their message.
You are of course entitled to stop posting/reading at any time in any thread, but I'd suggest to you to rethink it, for your own sake. Its an enjoyable, often insightful, helpful group of people, I reckon you will miss it.

SnowDrifts

redzerdrog wrote: »

Both to be honest, I have an interest in both but I think sport in general goes hand in hand with betting/odds of winning. Sport needs underdogs and overwhelming favorites and adds the the spectacle of sport, in a major a playoff win for 999/1 Alan Dunbar over 2/1 shot Tiger Woods would be more interesting/generate more opinion than say two evenly matched players like justin rose and luke donald.

Completely agree with this. I watch nearly every PGA event and every week, Sky talk about players odds and who is a good bet etc. Odds and betting are part of watching golf.

GreeBo

redzerdrog wrote: »

Both to be honest, I have an interest in both but I think sport in general goes hand in hand with betting/odds of winning. Sport needs underdogs and overwhelming favorites and adds the the spectacle of sport, in a major a playoff win for 999/1 Alan Dunbar over 2/1 shot Tiger Woods would be more interesting/generate more opinion than say two evenly matched players like justin rose and luke donald.

Of course its more interesting when people at opposite ends of the "expected to win scale" are fighting it out, but, as golfers I dont care what odds the bookies put on it. I already *know* who is more likely to win, the fact that they are 999/1 or 300/1 doesnt change my enjoyment of the event in the slightest. Multiple posts about their odds actually lessens my enjoyment.

I would counter that the actual odds only have any relevance to someone who has a bet and stands to make money on the result. That person is a gambler and should share that interest with other gamblers, not golfers who could care less.

charlieIRL

SnowDrifts wrote: »

Completely agree with this. I watch nearly every PGA event and every week, Sky talk about players odds and who is a good bet etc. Odds and betting are part of watching golf.

Not for everyone though. I watch the european tour, pga, lpga or whatever tour is televised during the week and betting never ever crosses my mind. Am just interested in certain players and enjoy the good shots along with the bad.


I used to watch the odd brittish superstock (bike racing) as I had a mate riding in it, but placing a bet on him or anyone winning never crossed my mind.

Maybe its just me!!




Now, where is that euro millions lotto ticket!!!:D

mag

GreeBo wrote: »

I dont see how disagreeing with someone is condescending or being authoritian.

its not. but theres a way of disagreeing & your attitude, tone and manner can come accross as very condescending, high handed and humourless. moderation doesnt need to be like that - licksy wasnt, for example.

GreeBo

mag wrote: »

its not. but theres a way of disagreeing & your attitude, tone and manner can come accross as very condescending, high handed and humourless. moderation doesnt need to be like that - licksy wasnt, for example.

I've never in my life been called humourless tbh so thats a new one!

At all times when posting as a Mod I'm deliberately trying to leave emotion out of it, perhaps thats what you are perceiving as condescending?

As a human (yes, I am not in fact Mod-Bot 2010 as previously suggested) its quite challenging to moderate things that you may not agree with or indeed may strongly agree with in an impartial manner but thats the nature of the job.
We try our best to leave personal opinion to one side when moderating and deal with everyone and everything fairly (and tbh I think we do a pretty good job)
You have to remember and acknowledge that everything we do is liable to annoy somebody and in turn lead to accusations of whatever against that mod. The only defence against this is to attempt to act impartially.


I'd also suggest that judging tone from text is a very dangerous thing to do, as I mentioned in the post you quoted, people often view anything said by an authority with suspicion and let pre-conceived ideas interrupt and misinterpret what is actually being said.

If you still firmly believe that I am being condescending/high handed then please feel free to PM me and we can discuss in private, as its certainly not my intention.

Thx for replying.

FixdePitchmark

OK. (Random flow)

feedback should be used to let people give opinions on how the forum should work. I don't think every idea should be discussed or dismissed or debated. feedback should be feedback , also it should not be discarded without due consideration.

At the same time, major changes should be flagged and debated. That enables the decision makers the full range of feelings on it.

I think we are losing very good posters - I know that is life (some would move on anyway) and it is just the bloody internet - but this is having a real impact on the forum. I know new people replace them - but we lose people with experience and sometimes professional experience in the field. This is a real sad element of the forum at the moment. People's personal differences are resulting in a public impact.

Again I know it is just the bloody internet.

GreeBo does a great job and has plenty of experience, but has so many angles to consider , I don't think we can have the awareness of why he needs to make certain decision. So , don't take things personally from him. He has a very hard job to do.

So , would people please consider very strongly before leaving over a Moderation debate. The forum is for all , it is not about your debate with the moderator.

You have to remember that the moderator has a job to do - do not personalise it please. I just ask for the good of all on the forum.

GreeBo - keep up the good work - just don't sink The Belgrano on some of your debates. I know you can win every debate - but think of it like The Good Friday Agreement. Just let a few go.
1)Tigergate (After drop 2)
2)NAMA (Maybe not)
3)P (AJcurry)-Megathread
4)Gambling (unsure on this one) :P
5)Sergio is a pain. ( I Do like him in Ryder cup but)

Anyway - plenty of red and yellow cards for me, I love them all , I am a pain in the hole.

ssbob

My own opinions(just off the phone with Greebo):D

PGA Epic thread wrecks my head as I hate too many posts about different tournaments and find it hard to follow, I much prefer the individual threads to discuss the bigger events at least! However I do understand some of the merits but doesn't mean I personally like it.

Betting, while I enjoy the odd flutter on golf myself, the forum charter is a fair representation of what feedback we have been given, however as the forum changes and new users join us that doesn't mean this can't change going forward! What I would say is that we get a lot of reported posts from regular users about betting talk in threads.

Greebo's moderation: while Greebo comes across strongly in his moderation and opinions, he has the benefit of a number of years of running the forum! What people don't realise is the amount of e-mails we receive behind the scenes, lots of instances where we could act but let slide. Greebo is the most active moderator but if he wasn't handing out the infractions 99% of the time Charlie or myself would.

PARlance

I still wish there was more gambling talk allowed, but at the same time I haven't missed it as much as I thought.

I think regulars would be well able to keep it under control but there's usually an influx of people around the majors and other big events (events that deserve their own threads ) and its these that can derail things.

Damn out of towners!!!

The Masters thread had a few hit n run heros talking about Rory's nationality and the types of betting posts that I don't think anyone gets much from. I was glad to see the thread remain on topic as these were stamped out pretty quickly.

But as I said, I'm still in favour of allowing more gambling talk. I like hearing about players who lads have an eye on, offering a different insight on etc.
I'm just not sure how it'd work.

I'm genuinely confused at this stage, are we allowed a gambling super thread?

For the majority of the year, I think this would be a great thread, it'd go ape sh1t during the majors but I'd take that over having nothing.

Personally I won't go onto the gambling forum with it. I prefer to see myself, rightly or wrongly, as a golfing fan that likes a flutter rather than a gambler than bets on golf. It may be a small point but its important to me.

blockic

GreeBo wrote: »

For me thats the wrong side of the line and the reason for this is that if you have no interest in betting/gambling then you have no interest in that post.
I know this is an emotive issue for you as you are into your gambling, but you have to respect that many, many people on here are not, they are golfers first and foremost.

The other issue is that if you allow a post like your example, then its very difficult to draw the line of whats allowed and what isnt.
The decision taken is to ensure that the user who wants to read about golf gets something to read about in every post, after all its the golf forum.

Make any more sense?

Almaviva wrote: »

Cant support that as a valid post. The thrust of it is your bet. And the real problem is that it tends too easily to head off into :

Poster1 : Got him at 80/1
Poster2 : Cabrera always bad value on that course. Back him on tough courses and you have a better chance.
Poster 3 : Agree with poster two. Took him for a place though.
Poster 4 : That the problem with Paddy Power poster 1, much better at...
etc
etc.

The above is joist noise in that context for those of us who dont follow gambling.

I'd have to agree 100% with the points above, as I am one such poster who has no interest in gambling and having such posts in a thread is a complete turn off for me. I wouldn't be in favour of a rule change and I'm sure many others on here would have a similar view point. The key is finding the right balance for those who have an interest ans those who don't.

By all means create a bettting thead, but I'm all for keeping betting talk out of golf discussions in a golf forum. Drives me nuts bth.

Just felt I needed to add my two cents.

Rikand

If we were basing the "winner" of this thread on who has received the most "thumbs up" to their posts, then my post would be the clear winner in this contest with 7 thumbs up!

Currently leading by 3!!!!

So here it is again. All bow down to the post of victory!

Rickylovesuall wrote: »

epic pga thread for the regular events

individual thread for ryder cup/majors/irish open

Yes the irish open. Our national open. The one some of our posters might actually be able to attend. How could we not have an individual thread on it ?

GreeBo

Rickylovesuall wrote: »

If we were basing the "winner" of this thread on who has received the most "thumbs up" to their posts, then my post would be the clear winner in this contest with 7 thumbs up!

Currently leading by 3!!!!

So here it is again. All bow down to the post of victory!



Yes the irish open. Our national open. The one some of our posters might actually be able to attend. How could we not have an individual thread on it ?

In that case I think a cut is in order before the next society event...

FixdePitchmark

How do you thank twice on this thing ?

New feedback - thank twice.

charlieIRL

Rickylovesuall wrote: »

If we were basing the "winner" of this thread on who has received the most "thumbs up" to their posts, then my post would be the clear winner in this contest with 7 thumbs up!

Currently leading by 3!!!!

So here it is again. All bow down to the post of victory!



Yes the irish open. Our national open. The one some of our posters might actually be able to attend. How could we not have an individual thread on it ?

soon enough we are going to need a thread just for your ego..........that will be mega as well!!!!!!!!!!!!!:P:D

PARlance

Rickylovesuall wrote: »

If we were basing the "winner" of this thread on who has received the most "thumbs up" to their posts, then my post would be the clear winner in this contest with 7 thumbs up!

Currently leading by 3!!!!

See Post #1 in this thread Ricky

Greebo ALWAYS wins

FixdePitchmark

GreeBo - I don't want to ask what part of my post you thanked - I think it was pain in the hole :mad:

FixdePitchmark

ajcurry123 wrote: »

See Post #1 in this thread Ricky

Greebo ALWAYS wins

QED

Rikand

GreeBo wrote: »

In that case I think a cut is in order before the next society event...

I will accept that cut..... if you actually show up for one

ssbob

Back on topic please guys!

Freemount09

I think it is sad when ANYONE (Mod or not) causes ANYONE (Good poster or not) to quit the forum.

Even sadder when it was a good poster.

From below extracts Ilik was well received, and if a Joe Soap was the reason for him to quit I would like the Mods to step in and hand out infractions to the said Joe Soap, and maybe ask Ilik back.

Ilik is a sound guy, made good contributions to this forum, has the best username here, and hopefully he'll come back.

ajcurry123 wrote: »

While I didn't agree with Iliks argument or leaving, he was much more than just a superb username, a great poster too and sad to see him go.

Almaviva wrote: »

I liked the cut of his gee too. Hopefully will return.

charlieIRL wrote: »

hopefully, have met the chap a few times, very nice fella.

Rickylovesuall wrote: »

sigh.

well I hope the rest of you are happy. Got rid of one of the nicer new posters this forum has had for quite some time

kiers47

Would this picture be entirely inappropriate?? ;-)

As regards betting I think that issue has been argued already and there is hardly any need for it to resurface however opposed or for it anyone is.it all smells of a bit like that Lisbon treaty thing we Didnt really like the outcome the first time around so let's try and get ye to change yer mind. FWIW I am for betting talk but It's hardly that big a deal.

I wouldn't be mad about the epic thread idea. While I see its merits if I wanted to see what people were saying about a tournament that happened a few months to a year ago it does make it quite difficult. It does come in useful to get insights for *cough*betting purposes*cough* if I wanted to see what people were saying in the same tournament last year as frankly the search is quite rubbish without specifics!!

super_furry

Not sure my voice counts for anything but this is a forum I actively avoid on boards because of the nature of the moderation. The nonsense outright ban on gambling talk, the dictatorial and heavy handed moderation and the stifling of a natural flow of conversation ensure that I look elsewhere for golf discussion.

Rikand

super_furry wrote: »

Not sure my voice counts for anything but this is a forum I actively avoid on boards because of the nature of the moderation. The nonsense outright ban on gambling talk, the dictatorial and heavy handed moderation and the stifling of a natural flow of conversation ensure that I look elsewhere for golf discussion.

And yet somehow you browse the forum enough to know about this topic and to make a post on it

ssbob

super_furry wrote: »

Not sure my voice counts for anything but this is a forum I actively avoid on boards because of the nature of the moderation. The nonsense outright ban on gambling talk, the dictatorial and heavy handed moderation and the stifling of a natural flow of conversation ensure that I look elsewhere for golf discussion.

All members of the forum have a voice!

If you are avoiding because of the "nonsense outright ban on gambling talk" then read the charter again, see also the new betting thread set up on foot of this thread last night and also while you were avoiding the forum we had a lengthy discussion about gambling talk on "GOLF" threads. As mentioned numerous times by the "heavy handed":rolleyes: Greebo above gambling talk is allowed as long as it is not the sole purpose for your post unless you are posting in the betting specific threads!

If you visited more often you would see that there is normally a great flow of golf discussion but as in any forum there is always going to be some contentious topics which "have to" be moderated, namely:

1. Rory McIlroys nationality
2. Shane Lowry's weight
3. Padraig Harringtons mind
4. Tigergate cheating scandal
5. Vijays deer antler spray issue

This happens in all forums..............

Almaviva

ssbob wrote: »

there is always going to be some contentious topics which "have to" be moderated, namely:

1. Rory McIlroys nationality
2. Shane Lowry's weight
   
3. Padraig Harringtons mind
4. Tigergate cheating scandal
5. Vijays deer antler spray issue

This happens in all forums..............

Tough one. He cant even moderate it himself.

{post deserves a ban I think}

GreeBo

Freemount09 wrote: »

I think it is sad when ANYONE (Mod or not) causes ANYONE (Good poster or not) to quit the forum.

Even sadder when it was a good poster.

From below extracts Ilik was well received, and if a Joe Soap was the reason for him to quit I would like the Mods to step in and hand out infractions to the said Joe Soap, and maybe ask Ilik back.

Ilik is a sound guy, made good contributions to this forum, has the best username here, and hopefully he'll come back.

Its always sad when a user decides to leave a forum (jeeze this is starting to sound like a eulogy!) but its a fact of life online.
I firmly believe that no one caused him to leave, he chose to leave.

He made some statements on this thread but when people disagreed with him and he was asked to back up/add more info to those points he decided this forum was a clique and left.

I really don't see what anyone bar the poster themselves can do in this situation, but would welcome any suggestions.

Note that we dont allow posters to drive other people away, we have a ban list to prove that. However people are perfectly entitled to disagree with each other, if someone doesnt like or cant handle that, thats their issue, as long as no rules are being breached people are entitled to their opinions and to say what they want.

Ilik Urgee

Lads I threw the toys out of the pram last night, Apologies to all for my spelling and insinuation, I saw red and shouldn't have.

Just on a more serious note, didn't the prodigal son get free coke n' hookers on his return?