Feedback Thread

GavRedKing

As with the usual Feedback Threads there will be a ZERO TOLERANCE POLICY on any trolling, abuse or breaches of the charter in this thread. Instead of the usual infraction/warning it will be an immediate one month ban for anyone who breaks the rules. If you want to post in this thread you are agreeing to accept this rule, so I don't want anyone coming to us b1tching and moaning because they think their ban is harsh if they break the rules on this thread.

Couple of basic ground rules before we get going:

(1) No constant scapegoating of individual posters. This isn't to turn into a witch hunt against posters you don't like. If you need to make a specific example to back up a more general point that's fine, but constantly singling out individual users as your sole point isn't on.


(2) If someone makes a point that you don't agree with then either respond in a constructive manner with a decent counter-point or don't respond at all. Attempted witty one liners to undermine an argument are pointless and will turn the thread into a clusterf*ck. Plus 99% of the time you think you're being funny, you're not. Same goes for pointless replies like: 'That's a stupid idea'. If you think it's not a good idea outline reasons why you think it's not going to work.


(3) Please, when you're making a point take a second to THINK about it and make sure it's what you actually want. So make sure when you're asking for something to happen that you realise it's going to effect you too, not just other users. When we crack down and nobody gets away with any abuse we are too draconian. When we allow a little bit of leeway we are too soft and because we are all different people, we will never have complete consistency.

(4) As usual, we'll be using 'Thanks' to work out what suggestions seem the most supported, so if you agree what someone says thank their post and it gives us a better idea and makes it easier to keep track that trying to add up loads of individual posts.


(5) Let's have a grown up discussion here.



Be aware that from last year’s Feedback thread we implemented the following into the charter and Forum :

Anybody that starts a " Are Manager X & Team Y Done " will receive a 2 week ban, these threads are nothing but baiting and serve no other purpose than to wind up fans of whatever team they are aimed at.

Yid is an offensive term and users will be infracted as per the abuse section of the charter where it is used.

Warnings and the sanctions that they receive.
Yellow means a warning. An infraction is the same as red (or two yellows). Where yellows are discussed, a red counts for two.
1st Yellow - Warning
2nd Yellow - 1 Week
3rd Yellow - 2 Weeks
4th Yellow - 1 Month
5th Yellow - 2 Months
6th Yellow - re-apply for access to the forum after 6 months.

Gifs that only serve a purpose to inflame or drag a thread off topic or otherwise do not contribute to a thread will be removed, if it is considered that the only purpose of that gif was to further inflame an argument, then the poster may receive a warning for it. (ie Michael Jackson/Popcorn gif/pictures)


A user who wishes to come back to the forum after a 6 infraction ban.
1) User applies through the soccer access forum with a special application (to be confirmed in the near future, before anyone who is due to come back is up for re-admittance).
2) Forum mods (and Cmods where the mods request it) will discuss the request and a response will be written on the application thread.
3) If the user is re-admitted, it is under the condition that if they get one infraction in the next three months they will be permanently banned. After the 3 month probation period they are considered full members of the forum once more.

Speculation about whether a user is a re-reg is a yellow card offence. If you think there is an issue with someone being a re-reg then report it to a mod and if action need be taken it will be. Otherwise, keep your speculation to yourself.

RasTa

The tone used from the offset is everything what's wrong with the moderation on the SF

As with the usual Feedback Threads there will be a ZERO TOLERANCE POLICY on any trolling, abuse or breaches of the charter in this thread. Instead of the usual infraction/warning it will be an immediate one month ban for anyone who breaks the rules. If you want to post in this thread you are agreeing to accept this rule, so I don't want anyone coming to us b1tching and moaning because they think their ban is harsh if they break the rules on this thread.

GavRedKing

So I take it you find the moderation of the forum too harsh and aggressive and to the letter of the charter.

What do you propose for us to change then?

Jax Teller

I want to express my concerns over some decisions on here but ill be given a ban or warning over it as I'd be questioning the mod .

GavRedKing

Jax Teller wrote: »

I want to express my concerns over some decisions on here but ill be given a ban or warning over it as I'd be questioning the mod .

Nope, give us your feedback but dont use it as a base to say " I think X Mod is shit because this was or wasnt actioned "

Criticism is welcome, its yere feedback thread for us to try and improve the place for everyone.

Jax Teller

I think the whole " Fat Ronaldo " thing that went on recently wasn't right .

Bounty Hunter

Jax Teller wrote: »

I want to express my concerns over some decisions on here but ill be given a ban or warning over it as I'd be questioning the mod .

in a usual situation i'd say pm the mod but as this thread is specifically for feedback id say express your concerns but of course remind that this is not a dispute resolution thread or whatever and that argueing specifics on threads can derail threads like this into people just wanting to air grevances about their specific bans. Are there any specific issues which you have seen arise that should be able to be avoided if moderators acted differently and perhaps had an altered charter.

Mars Bar

Jax Teller wrote: »

I think the whole " Fat Ronaldo " thing that went on recently wasn't right .

Tell us why. I know it involves me as I was the mod handling the situation. I agree, the charter is awkward with regard to the abuse rule.

Bounty Hunter

Jax Teller wrote: »

I think the whole " Fat Ronaldo " thing that went on recently wasn't right .

Was someone banned over that? I do remember someone being warned over it and tbh they should be warned that its against the charter, if it should be in the charter would be a valid question to answer now though imo.

The term annoys me, but its also a way to describe someone and may not neccesarily be used as an insult or to wind someone up

Oranage2

Mars Bar wrote: »

Tell us why. I know it involves me as I was the mod handling the situation. I agree, the charter is awkward with regard to the abuse rule.

Maybe you could use common sense then?

Turtyturd

GavRedKing wrote: »

So I take it you find the moderation of the forum too harsh and aggressive and to the letter of the charter.

What do you propose for us to change then?

Inconsistancy is the main problem with a lot of moderation tbh.

Mars Bar

Oranage2 wrote: »

Maybe you could use common sense then?

Great start to the thread alright.

Common sense would have me differentiate them by nationality. The ban came about as it was an accumulation of yellows.

Oranage2

Oranage2 wrote: »

Maybe you could use common sense then?

That comment wasn't aimed at you or a specific situation mars.

I just feel some cards are handed out because the chapter says so but are quite soft.

KevIRL

Put the GAE forum out of its misery please, the idea was fine as just a single thread in the main forum, a bit of a novelty and probably would have kept going, but the sub forum killed it.

Hardly the most pressing thing to be sorted on here I know but still it is pointless

Mars Bar

Oranage2 wrote: »

That comment wasn't aimed at you or a specific situation mars.

I just feel some cards are handed out because the chapter says so but are quite soft.

Bounty Hunter

Oranage2 wrote: »

Maybe you could use common sense then?

Turtyturd wrote: »

Inconsistancy is the main problem with a lot of moderation tbh.

so should we stick closer to the charter to be consistant or use our commen sense?

guys get specific if you can about what issues are a problem and what rule changes could in your minds help. If we are to stay consistant, should that be a problem, then we should have a proper guideline to stick to. A lot was changed last year so speak up

Lovely Bloke

Jax Teller wrote: »

I think the whole " Fat Ronaldo " thing that went on recently wasn't right .

No, it wasn't.

If you want this place to turn into a F365esque hole, then by all means, let's allow all manner of stuff like Whisky Nose, Fat Spanish Waiter, Fat Frank or whatever else floats your boat.

People get uppity when "their" team or player is called a name, so it's just better to stick a blanket ban on everything rather than have someone get carded in six months for slagging someone that a poster is actually sensitive about and then pull the "But Fat Ronaldo is allowed" card.

The place is better for it, what, exactly, do people gain from using these playground terms anyway?

Bounty Hunter

KevIRL wrote: »

Put the GAE forum out of its misery please, the idea was fine as just a single thread in the main forum, a bit of a novelty and probably would have kept going, but the sub forum killed it.

Hardly the most pressing thing to be sorted on here I know but still it is pointless

this has been discussed by the mods, as said not a pressing concern but we agree in many ways

Andersonisgod

Know this is the feedback thread and I know usually that means highlighting negatives that can be improved upon but I just want to add that I've been on a few football forums in the past and I think the mods have the right level of control on this forum. On the Sky Sports Forum there was no control whatsoever and the place was wild, Sky had to shut it down in the end. I've been on other forums where personal abuse is tolerated. I think the mods here are approachable and generally tend to excersise a good degree of common sense. Yes someone might highlight the odd exception to that but there'll always be a one off mistake wherever you go. Generally I think the moderating on this forum is very good.

An example being in the Ireland vs Spain thread, there were a few profanities used, the mods were in straight away to stamp it out. I can honestly say that I've not been on another football forum where football debate so rarely turns into a personal slagging match and I think some of the credit for that should go to the mods approach.

DM_7

As often said in soccer:

Not all yellows are the same.

Referees need to work within the rules but also have the option to use discretion.

I think both apply to the forum, if Mods can edit posts then that is what they should do if they feel its appropriate and avoid use of a yellow for minor offences.

Maybe a quick PM could be sent to remind someone that an edit was made in line with the charter, discretion was used and it was decided not to issue a yellow.

This could be done on thread in the amended post either.


If that is all that is 'wrong' with the forum then I think things are going pretty well and the majority of moderation calls are right

RasTa

GavRedKing wrote: »

So I take it you find the moderation of the forum too harsh and aggressive and to the letter of the charter.

What do you propose for us to change then?

You seem not to handle cards out anymore for popcorn gifs, which should be the case. I really don't see the point in that rule.

Issuing cards to someone who calls a user a troll is also silly when the trolls go unpunished.

Same for re-reg.

This shouldn't be a hard place to mod but yet with all those weird rules in the charter people get banned who shouldn't and the people who should don't.

It's also a joke that there is a Chelsea and Spurs private forums and none for other teams.

PhlegmyMoses

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

No, it wasn't.

If you want this place to turn into a F365esque hole, then by all means, let's allow all manner of stuff like Whisky Nose, Fat Spanish Waiter, Fat Frank or whatever else floats your boat.

People get uppity when "their" team or player is called a name, so it's just better to stick a blanket ban on everything rather than have someone get carded in six months for slagging someone that a poster is actually sensitive about and then pull the "But Fat Ronaldo is allowed" card.

The place is better for it, what, exactly, do people gain from using these playground terms anyway?

Fat Ronaldo is not meant as a derogatory term, unlike the rest of those. It's used to differentiate between him and Cristiano Ronaldo. Sure, you could use Brazilian Ronaldo or whatever but the use of the term Fat Ronaldo is not done with the intention to offend. It is meant in a different way to Fat Spanish Waiter or Whisky Nose so comparisons are not valid. Anybody trying to compare them misunderstands the reasons why it's not cool to use the other terms. I thought they were harsh yellows, given the spirit of the posts.

Leiva

I don't know if it's a really hard thing to identify or prove as I have never been a mod/admin, but if you could better tackle re-reg and double identities then this place would run a hell of a lot smoother.

Sometimes it's so obvious what's going on when a previous banned user enters the fray under a different name. Others react, shït hits the fan, and in some cases the re-reg walks away whilst others around pick up infractions.Job done.

The_Kew_Tour

There should be a way of blocking a poster completely not just ignore button but also for them to not engage in conversation. With the acceptence of a Mod of course.

There is a poster who just thanks every post that goes against mine. I never took any notice till got few PM from posters asking what is up last week.

At first I found it funny now its gone little disturbing(in a wtf way:pac:). I also know that poster has been saying things to other posters about me. I dont know the guy and dont want to. Not somthing I will lose sleep over but maybe suggestion for people who just want honest debate with people trolling for no reason

Have zero problem with everyone else and find the SF enjoyable and laugh with lot of people. Some great posters here from all sides even Liverpool;)

Overall I think Mods have tough job and think they try be fair as can. Cant please everyone I guess.:)

Big Pussy Bonpensiero

RasTa wrote: »

It's also a joke that there is a Chelsea and Spurs private forums and none for other teams.

Yawn.

Gets brought up every so often, get over it. There's plenty of team dedicated forums throughout the web to keep you entertained, if there was a separate forum for each team it would greatly diminish the soccer forum.


The moderation on here is fine, you can't please all of the people all of the time. Any improvements to be made should be minor.

dfx-

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

Fat Ronaldo is not meant as a derogatory term, unlike the rest of those. It's used to differentiate between him and Cristiano Ronaldo. Sure, you could use Brazilian Ronaldo or whatever but the use of the term Fat Ronaldo is not done with the intention to offend. It is meant in a different way to Fat Spanish Waiter or Whisky Nose so comparisons are not valid. Anybody trying to compare them misunderstands the reasons why it's not cool to use the other terms. I thought they were harsh yellows, given the spirit of the posts.

Given Ronaldo's reaction himself to Ferguson's recent slip-up, I don't know if he'd see it as a term of endearment. I haven't seen any evidence in interviews or articles where he has said he doesn't mind it.

Super-Rush

THFC wrote: »

Yawn.

Gets brought up every so often, get over it. There's plenty of team dedicated forums throughout the web to keep you entertained, if there was a separate forum for each team it would greatly diminish the soccer forum.


The moderation on here is fine, you can't please all of the people all of the time. Any improvements to be made should be minor.

Then you won't have any problems with the Spurs forum being shut down will you?

BOHtox

DM-ICE wrote: »

As often said in soccer:

Not all yellows are the same.

Referees need to work within the rules but also have the option to use discretion.

I think both apply to the forum, if Mods can edit posts then that is what they should do if they feel its appropriate and avoid use of a yellow for minor offences.

Maybe a quick PM could be sent to remind someone that an edit was made in line with the charter, discretion was used and it was decided not to issue a yellow.

This could be done on thread in the amended post either.


If that is all that is 'wrong' with the forum then I think things are going pretty well and the majority of moderation calls are right

I agree and disagree. There can be warnings given about reminders of the charter which is fine. A quick pm reminding you that you're not allowed to do x,y and z is all very well and good. I definitely think more warnings instead of booking should be given for minor offences.

A mod should not edit a post though as mods editing posts would upset the integrity of the forum, even if the aforementioned post bordered on, or deserved, a booking.

The idea of a LOI sub-forum comes up every now and then but I think recently the mods have gotten in right. More lenient modding in the LOI threads by LOI mods have definitely reduced the number of cautions and there certainly has been a clampdown of trolls in LOI threads.

There's a problem with LOI threads being caught up with other threads but C'est la vie.

Turtyturd

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

Fat Ronaldo is not meant as a derogatory term, unlike the rest of those. It's used to differentiate between him and Cristiano Ronaldo. Sure, you could use Brazilian Ronaldo or whatever but the use of the term Fat Ronaldo is not done with the intention to offend.

The thing is though if someone used the term 'Greasy Ronaldo' without meaning it in a derogatory way, and just as a descriptive characteristic it would be reported numerous times, and most likely by the same people who are okay with the term 'Fat Ronaldo' so both should be banned for the sake of consistency.

Oranage2

Mars Bar wrote: »

Sorry I wrote that just before I went to bed so when I reread it, it looked bad.




Just to forward my actual point, I really like this forum because you get all the fans interacting with out the personal insults you get on other forums, I also like the new mods this year too, I've posted a lot more since all the new mods were installed, I think the mods allow a lot more banter, I felt the last mods wanted an elitist forum but these days its a lot more fun place to post.

All that said, I feel if you have a go at a certain team that you'll run the risk of a soft card, the mods allow a lot of banter say in a united chelsea game, same with arsenal who ever, I remember the 8-2 and a lot of banter was posted, I'm not sure about the card count either but id say it was small, and I think that's a good thing because it resembles real life with you mates giving a slaging or some drunk in the bar. Then you have the opposite with a Liverpool game, you can't post anything if they lose or its seeing as WUMing, I think their victim mentality has conned the mods a tad, honestly sometimes I feel having a go at pool is on par with antisemitisism and racism. Even the not having their forum they think they're being discriminated against, also if you look at the pool thread, nani is crap is allow fair enough its an opinion, but then say if someone says Lucas is crap which is beyond a fact, then its as if they're being persecuted, same with the Celtic pool thread, some genuine hilarious comments and would be allowed if united, arsenal, chelsea were playing Celtic but again because it was Liverpool it was persecution!

I think my point is that mods are particularly strict when it comes to Liverpool and I think that perhaps that could be looked at?

dfx-

RasTa wrote: »

You seem not to handle cards out anymore for popcorn gifs, which should be the case. I really don't see the point in that rule.

I am very much in favour of this rule. I can't recall any popcorn gif either through scanning through threads myself or through the reported posts system since the rule was introduced.

I can recall people commenting that they were discouraged, but I don't recall a major issue with this rule.

Blatter

Just a bit more discretion to use common sense. Was reading the DR thread from Pj! and I don't like to see people getting banned over things like using the expression fat Ronaldo in the context it was used.

IMO when you see a post like this that you are unsure of, ask yourselves the following questions:


1 - Was it the posters intention to incite a negative reaction/annoy other members of the forum with said abuse?

2 - Did the said abuse actually cause trouble or did it have the potential to?


If the answer is yes to either of those questions, infract the post.

If the answer is no to both of those questions (which it often is), use some common sense and don't hand out the infraction.

Bounty Hunter

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

so should we stick closer to the charter to be consistant or use our commen sense?

guys get specific if you can about what issues are a problem and what rule changes could in your minds help. If we are to stay consistant, should that be a problem, then we should have a proper guideline to stick to. A lot was changed last year so speak up

How specific? Should we point out specific grievances? That would be more for dispute resolution no?

My main problem with the moderation here is that someone will slip up and say what they mean once and it's a yellow card while others will be lucky enough to do it on another thread just before a warning and it's fine. Then others will flagrantly (and even mention within the post that they're breaching the charter) call a player/manager/referee/journalist by a crass name and they'll still only get a yellow card. One slip shouldn't show up the same as someone purposely being smart knowing that an old infraction just passed 6 months so they have a free pass.

THFC wrote: »

Yawn.

Gets brought up every so often, get over it. There's plenty of team dedicated forums throughout the web to keep you entertained, if there was a separate forum for each team it would greatly diminish the soccer forum.


The moderation on here is fine, you can't please all of the people all of the time. Any improvements to be made should be minor.

I'm very surprised that that's your view.


As for the "Fat Ronaldo" thing, I say it in jest, mainly to non-United fans (it's "The Real Ronaldo" for them) and it's a differentiation. TBH I say it with a fondness because no-one doesn't know what you mean when you say it.

Xavi6

Fat Ronaldo is the same as Fat Frank for me, neither are necessary. You can just as easily say Brazilian Ronaldo or CR7 (:pac:) to distinguish them.

For me the biggest bug bear is pandering to the over sensitive souls, the Pool/Celtic thread locking being the most recent example. If there are OTT comments then infract/ban as per the charter but little digs should be allowed slide because, guess what, not everyone likes your club. It's part and parcel of football so if you don't like it get off the Internet.

By all means bite back but reporting everything under the sun or locking the thread is just nonsense.

Kerrigooney

Oranage2 wrote: »

Sorry I wrote that just before I went to bed so when I reread it, it looked bad.




Just to forward my actual point, I really like this forum because you get all the fans interacting with out the personal insults you get on other forums, I also like the new mods this year too, I've posted a lot more since all the new mods were installed, I think the mods allow a lot more banter, I felt the last mods wanted an elitist forum but these days its a lot more fun place to post.

All that said, I feel if you have a go at a certain team that you'll run the risk of a soft card, the mods allow a lot of banter say in a united chelsea game, same with arsenal who ever, I remember the 8-2 and a lot of banter was posted, I'm not sure about the card count either but id say it was small, and I think that's a good thing because it resembles real life with you mates giving a slaging or some drunk in the bar. Then you have the opposite with a Liverpool game, you can't post anything if they lose or its seeing as WUMing, I think their victim mentality has conned the mods a tad, honestly sometimes I feel having a go at pool is on par with antisemitisism and racism. Even the not having their forum they think they're being discriminated against, also if you look at the pool thread, nani is crap is allow fair enough its an opinion, but then say if someone says Lucas is crap which is beyond a fact, then its as if they're being persecuted, same with the Celtic pool thread, some genuine hilarious comments and would be allowed if united, arsenal, chelsea were playing Celtic but again because it was Liverpool it was persecution!

I think my point is that mods are particularly strict when it comes to Liverpool and I think that perhaps that could be looked at?

Even in the feedback thread you can't help yourself,can you?

RasTa

dfx- wrote: »

I am very much in favour of this rule. I can't recall any popcorn gif either through scanning through threads myself or through the reported posts system since the rule was introduced.

I can recall people commenting that they were discouraged, but I don't recall a major issue with this rule.

I got a week ban for one, guess I'm the only poster.

counterlock

Out of curiousity, how many mods look at a reported post?

padd b1975

counterlock wrote: »

Out of curiousity, how many mods look at a reported post?

I think they all get a PM of the reported post.

In another feedback thread, some mods said they hardly ever visit the reported posts forum.

counterlock

padd b1975 wrote: »

I think they all get a PM of the reported post.

In another feedback thread, some mods said they hardly ever visit the reported posts forum.

So the decision lies with whoever gets to the pm first?

The reason I'm asking is because I'm curious to see why one charter breach would be infracted (yes my breach) yet another is not.

keith16

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

Fat Ronaldo is not meant as a derogatory term, unlike the rest of those. It's used to differentiate between him and Cristiano Ronaldo. Sure, you could use Brazilian Ronaldo or whatever but the use of the term Fat Ronaldo is not done with the intention to offend. It is meant in a different way to Fat Spanish Waiter or Whisky Nose so comparisons are not valid. Anybody trying to compare them misunderstands the reasons why it's not cool to use the other terms. I thought they were harsh yellows, given the spirit of the posts.

Nah, I don't like the fat Ronaldo thing. Let's say there are two people in town or in school with the same name. If I heard some one distinguish between them using fat, while thinking they are being funny, I would feel embarrased for the person using it. Regardless of intent.

Overall I think the Soccer Forum is one of the best on boards. Very active forum and difficult to get the modding right. The only thing I will say is that some match threads seem to lack any modding. But as I say, very busy forum.

Mars Bar

padd b1975 wrote: »

I think they all get a PM of the reported post.

In another feedback thread, some mods said they hardly ever visit the reported posts forum.

Reported posts comes through Email. It's easier to click the link there straight to the offending post. There is no need to visit the reported posts forum.

The "don't be a dick/Muppet Rule" could probably be used more often tbh.

PhlegmyMoses

dfx- wrote: »

Given Ronaldo's reaction himself to Ferguson's recent slip-up, I don't know if he'd see it as a term of endearment. I haven't seen any evidence in interviews or articles where he has said he doesn't mind it.

This isn't really my point. Maybe I'm arguing against the wrong thing. Is the purpose of the Fat Ronaldo ban to make sure we aren't using derogatory terms that may offend the person who it references, or to not offend people who actually read the board? Both are fair enough I suppose - harsh yellows but meh, I never use the term.

I was only arguing against the idea that it has the same malicious overtones as Fat Spanish Waiter or Whisky nose, which it clearly does not. The posters use it to differentiate between two people, not to offend or belittle which is the only point of the other terms referenced. Whether you guys want to be handing out cards for that is up to yourselves of course. I just think a little more discretion could be used.

Bounty Hunter

counterlock wrote: »

Out of curiousity, how many mods look at a reported post?

padd b1975 wrote: »

I think they all get a PM of the reported post.

In another feedback thread, some mods said they hardly ever visit the reported posts forum.

Yep, I for instance get emails everytime there is a reported post although I dont really remember the last time I was in the reported post forum recently, those emails do link directly to whatever has been reported and contain what the person reporting it had to say on the matter. We do have a soccer mods forum too where we can discuss issues so it wouldnt be too surprising to hear a soccer mod not going to the reported post forum very regularily.

I think any forum when it gets this big with as many active posting members can come in for some criticism as can its moderation. For instance a lot of the regulars in the other forum I moderate think of this place as a bit of a mad house but in comparison to other big football forums this place is so much better and far less tribal (even if the smaller element of this can still cause consternation for some).

o wait I just got an email about a reported post so ill leave my waffle for another time.... now off to the mod cave

lordgoat

So would someone be infracted for saying 'the larger ronaldo' 'plump ronaldo' 'rotund ronaldo' 'older ronaldo' 'lighter skinned ronaldo' 'the footballer formerly known as fat ronaldo' or 'skinny ronaldo' etc?

what is the difference in saying one of the above than saying 'Rooney is fat' 'Anderson looks like he's had a few pies' etc?

If a few of the mods could answer this please.

GavRedKing

RasTa wrote: »

It's also a joke that there is a Chelsea and Spurs private forums and none for other teams.

How many times have we been through this?

From the Admins :

We've been through this many times. There will not be any forums created for individual teams. The Spurs one was created a long time ago when the procedure was different and the Chelsea one was only created because social groups have been removed as part of Boards and active social groups were converted into hosted forums.

GavRedKing

counterlock wrote: »

Out of curiousity, how many mods look at a reported post?

I get an Email to my work Email address, if I'm in work, usually 8-5 I'll check it ASAP, if I'm not in work or the weekends, I'll check the reported posts forum every half hour or so when I'm online.

Xavi6

GavRedKing wrote: »

How many times have we been through this?

From the Admins :

The Spurs one was fair enough as it was way back in the day but this Chelsea forum (which I didn't know about until today) goes against every argument that has been peddled for years for not having club specific forums.

If they got one then, unfortunately, so should United, Liverpool and whoever else. The admins have stupidly made a bed for themselves here IMO.

LiamoSail

Xavi6 wrote: »

Fat Ronaldo is the same as Fat Frank for me, neither are necessary. You can just as easily say Brazilian Ronaldo or CR7 (:pac:) to distinguish them.

.

The should be a banning offence. And not just from the forum, but the Internet in general

Blatter

GavRedKing wrote: »

How many times have we been through this?

From the Admins :

Whatever about the Spurs one that's been there for ages, imo the Chelsea one being created on the back of a technicality/loophole shouldn't have been allowed happen unless the admins were open to creating one for United, Liverpool or Arsenal, which they're clearly not. It's all a bit ridiculous.

RasTa

Xavi6 wrote: »

The Spurs one was fair enough as it was way back in the day but this Chelsea forum (which I didn't know about until today) goes against every argument that has been peddled for years for not having club specific forums.

If they got one then, unfortunately, so should United, Liverpool and whoever else. The admins have stupidly made a bed for themselves here IMO.

+1 either listen to the feedback which seems to have being raised often enough to be considered a headache regarding private forums.