Issue with Soccer Forum

googled eyes

efb wrote: »

It's an in joke and cliquish

.

mike65

The Liverpool thread has been full of good humour and yes long winded running in jokes about wood and Lord Trollingtons bet and its what makes the thread to be honest. If football was the only reason to post the place would be as quite as a Hyde FC supporters thread.

Bobeagleburger

Pro. F wrote: »

The soccer forum is not just a soccer debate. The forum as a whole, and the team threads in particular, is a community where all sorts of football discussion goes on. People tell jokes and have ongoing jokes. Gifs and pics are a part of that.

I could see why the panda gifs were banned from the match thread the other night. They were clogging it up. And it looked like it was possibly the case that those pictures were being spammed to prevent discussion, discussion that the LFC fans thought was trolling. So banning that joke, in that thread, at that time made sense. But in the team super thread, where Liverpool fans are getting giddy about their season that is not what is happening. It's just excited fans sharing a joke.

Spot on

Knex*

GavRedKing wrote: »

Yup they sure can.

Ive being carded on recently for calling out Ramires tackle against Villa.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=89476902&postcount=153

I don't want to be an ass about this, but I know someone on our thread called Salah a prat when he missed, and I was also reading the Chelsea thread during the game.

You had a post, which you since deleted I think, that had some choice words to say about him too.

Now, like I say, I don't want to be an ass about it, but it just highlights some of the inconsistency that we are seeing.

Also, to put on record, I don't really see how either incident today warranted an infraction. Your Ramires post on the other hand was perhaps a little excessive :pac:

GavRedKing

Knex. wrote: »

I don't want to be an ass about this, but I know someone on our thread called Salah a prat when he missed, and I was also reading the Chelsea thread during the game.

You had a post, which you since deleted I think, that had some choice words to say about him too.

Now, like I say, I don't want to be an ass about it, but it just highlights some of the inconsistency that we are seeing.

Also, to put on record, I don't really see how either incident today warranted an infraction. Your Ramires post on the other hand was perhaps a little excessive :pac:

I didnt delete it anyway but I know the post, I called him a useless clown, iirc.

TBF the Ramires one was a little harsh but it was the exact feeling of the majority of people, shocking tackle.

Anyway, back to the larger issue of this feedback thread, let me have a look and get ye a proper answer to LL's post in due time.

brevity

OwaynOTT wrote: »

The sad thing is, the pandas were only a fad and would have died by today I'd say.

The panda's have now become a symbol of oppression all over the world. I think I saw one walk in front of a tank in Ukraine.

Gbear

Knex. wrote: »

The issue here lies with reviewing incidents on a singular post merit, and not a body of work.

Allows obvious wind ups to hide behind the charter, and then any questioning of said posters, or referencing them, results in overall respectable posters getting the infractions.

I think a lot of the frustration among the forum stems from this, really. Mods aren't allowed use common sense, and say, "Look, you haven't strictly broken one of the rules, but you're being an obvious dick, and you have many deliberately provocative posts to show for it".

Their hands, I believe, are somewhat tied in this regard, and the Forum won't improve until its changed.

If the mods have complete discretion people will start moaning that the charter is too vague and flaccid and needs to be more concrete.
I'm not sure it's something you can get right.

That's not to say it can't improve in general though.

The charter isn't the constitution of our country. It doesn't have to be legally bulletproof. A bit of leeway to crack down on the odd troll mightn't go amiss. Being on boards is optional, so they can have any rules they like. Mods don't really have to be "technically correct" in their decisions.

I think the Soccer Mods have done a pretty good job by and large but things have just gone a bit weird lately. Obviously Liverpool fans are somewhat to blame because we've progressively gotten more and more mental over the past month or so but I don't think that accounts for all of the problem.

5starpool

People being carded for calling their own players names who have done something stupid or missed a chance, etc, is my biggest pet peeve about the SF this season, but I'll be raising that in the soccer feedback thread whenever it gets going.

It's beyond ridiculous and another instance of applying a rule to the totally wrong situation.

Nuri Sahin

#FreeAde2K14 #KentuckyFriedPanda

Liam O

Knex. wrote: »

The issue here lies with reviewing incidents on a singular post merit, and not a body of work.

Allows obvious wind ups to hide behind the charter, and then any questioning of said posters, or referencing them, results in overall respectable posters getting the infractions.

I think a lot of the frustration among the forum stems from this, really. Mods aren't allowed use common sense, and say, "Look, you haven't strictly broken one of the rules, but you're being an obvious dick, and you have many deliberately provocative posts to show for it".

Their hands, I believe, are somewhat tied in this regard, and the Forum won't improve until its changed.

I agree fully, I remember the Muppet was banned for this, I didn't think he was being that bad but he was offending enough people that he must have been up to something.

How many other people have been banned under this ruling? There are certain people who could do with even being banned from rival team match threads, difficult to enforce I guess but when your only contribution in 90% of rival team threads after a goal is scored posting LOL, or going ott on every contentious incident in an attempt to rile up others and get them banned something has to be looked at.

Orion

rarnes1 wrote: »

Two questions I have:

1. Does a post have to be reported to be acted on?

2. Why do some mods delete inappropraite posts while others card people for them?


Neither are a pop at moderation but genuinely interested to know

1. No. Neither does a reported post have to be acted on. If a mod sees an actionable post they will act on it. Reporting it helps because in busy forum mods cannot read every post. But just because a post is reported doesn't mean it is actionable. Mods act on the forum charter and site rules.
2. Mods are people. And volunteers. Deleted posts may be carded too. Or one mod may send a pm saying cop on while another may use a yellow card to do the same. Different approaches to the same ends.

I don't follow soccer so the above is without any refefence to Soccer forum moderation.

dzer2

Just noticed the lack of posts and thanks from the members that should be in here that were in the match threads and rivals threads over the last while.

GavRedKing

5starpool wrote: »

People being carded for calling their own players names who have done something stupid or missed a chance, etc, is my biggest pet peeve about the SF this season, but I'll be raising that in the soccer feedback thread whenever it gets going.

It's beyond ridiculous and another instance of applying a rule to the totally wrong situation.

Soon, expect it after the UCL Final but prior to the WC, so we can implement new rules/changes that you guys have brought up as our season runs July-August inclusive.

Nuri Sahin

Liam O wrote: »

I agree fully, I remember the Muppet was banned for this, I didn't think he was being that bad but he was offending enough people that he must have been up to something.

How many other people have been banned under this ruling? There are certain people who could do with even being banned from rival team match threads, difficult to enforce I guess but when you're only contribution in 90% of rival team threads after a goal is scored posting LOL, or going ott on every contentious incident in an attempt to rile up others and get them banned something has to be looked at.

It's not really difficult to enforce though. You just have active mods, and no they don't have to be around 24/7. The big EPL team matchthreads need one if not two moderators around. Simple as that. There have been times where there are no mods around. There's mods there who are barely active, it was the case before and it'll probably be the case in the future, unfortunately.

LuckyLloyd

GavRedKing wrote: »

Soon, expect it after the UCL Final but prior to the WC, so we can implement new rules/changes that you guys have brought up as our season runs July-August inclusive.

I would suggest though that this issue is specific in nature and it is reasonable to raise it now as things were getting a bit out of hand. If we get it sorted it won't need to be rehashed in the end of season thread either.

Will I Amnt

dzer2 wrote: »

Just noticed the lack of posts and thanks from the members that should be in here that were in the match threads and rivals threads over the last while.

What has that got to do with anything?

Grayditch

The way some mods talk down to posters/groups of posters is so counterproductive. If you start branding people as childish, that's actually an insult, accurate or not, so expect push back and for it to get a whole lot more childish.

It's often hard to respect the work mods do keeping the soccer forums murder free zones, when the inconsistencies are so prevalent, but that's the nature of the beast. I'm just wondering if mod actions/behaviour are reviewed properly by someone in...charge?

I've seen time and time again calm reasoning working almost all of the time.

"Ah lads, seriously, give over with the panda thing, its getting silly"

Maybe I missed a post of this kind.

It really feels like some mods get off on their bold, long winded, patronising warnings to be honest. They really don't always go down well and this week was over zealous modding 101.

But soccer forums... generally modded well enough. I'd say a lot of learning will be done from all sides this week, though. Good posters banned after being frustrated by chest puffing, when simple reasoning would have worked.

Grown ups talking to grown ups at the end of the day, get it done the easy way when you know you can.

Bounty Hunter

1 of the things a lot of pepole got mixed up with in the past day or two was the notion of the "in jokes"

There is no problem with in jokes in theory (obviously it depends on how they are used / the meaning behind them - as you obviously couldn't use them to target another poster for example) however the problem arises when these jokes are deemed to have gone to far and as in the case of the match thread a moderator steps in.

That thread was a mess and impossible to read especially when a huge proportion of the people reading the thread were not in on the "in joke" which seemed to be taking over the thread ( as was the case for virtually everyone who wasnt a regular in the thread they originated in) before it was locked and cleaned up. There was then a very clear mod message placed in the thread which was duplicated in the OP of the thread which was highlighted in the thread title. It was only when this mod Instruction was ignored (through whatever it was be it Pandas / saps or whatever) did people start receiving warnings and those warnings were for ignoring mod instrction and not for posting Pandas etc

Does a post have to be reported to be acted on? hell no, but If its reported a mod is far far more likely to a) see it and b) know that other people find it offensive in whatever way

On the same point though perhaps a post isn't reported and thus not seen by a mod who (lets face it isn't going to see / read every post) then warns / infracts a poster over something it will not do that poster any good to then point out this post that slipped through the cracks and say if they didn't get X, Y or Z then neither should I. Perhaps by highlighting that post you will get someone else warned / infracted as might have happened if it had originally been reported but it will not change what you posted and the warning or whatever you got as a result.

GavRedKing

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I would suggest though that this issue is specific in nature and it is reasonable to raise it now as things were getting a bit out of hand. If we get it sorted it won't need to be rehashed in the end of season thread either.

Your issue will be dealt with long before the SF feedback thread LL and anything else you guys want to bring up in a few weeks time when the SF feedback thread rolls around your more than welcome to make, the more constructive the posts the better though, as it will help us understand yere issues.

LuckyLloyd

Thanks BH, but why were people having posts deleted and being carded for posting Pandas in the Superthread today - i.e. not the match thread with the clear bolded moderator warning?

Knex*

Everyone agrees the panda thing in the match thread was fair, if perhaps the method of dealing with it was a little excessive.

The sap thing was a moderation mistake. It had no business being put in the mod note and then being used as a means to card people. The fact that people still have infractions to their name because of this, is a blot on said mod's copybook, really.

I honestly can't get over that we are having this discussion. Bizarre doesn't do it justice.

Deleting posts without any warning or notification, and then following this up with infractions in the Superthread was also surely less than fair.

5starpool

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

1 of the things a lot of pepole got mixed up with in the past day or two was the notion of the "in jokes"

There is no problem with in jokes in theory (obviously it depends on how they are used / the meaning behind them - as you obviously couldn't use them to target another poster for example) however the problem arises when these jokes are deemed to have gone to far and as in the case of the match thread a moderator steps in.

That thread was a mess and impossible to read especially when a huge proportion of the people reading the thread were not in on the "in joke" which seemed to be taking over the thread ( as was the case for virtually everyone who wasnt a regular in the thread they originated in) before it was locked and cleaned up. There was then a very clear mod message placed in the thread which was duplicated in the OP of the thread which was highlighted in the thread title. It was only when this mod Instruction was ignored (through whatever it was be it Pandas / saps or whatever) did people start receiving warnings and those warnings were for ignoring mod instrction and not for posting Pandas etc

Does a post have to be reported to be acted on? hell no, but If its reported a mod is far far more likely to a) see it and b) know that other people find it offensive in whatever way

On the same point though perhaps a post isn't reported and thus not seen by a mod who (lets face it isn't going to see / read every post) then warns / infracts a poster over something it will not do that poster any good to then point out this post that slipped through the cracks and say if they didn't get X, Y or Z then neither should I. Perhaps by highlighting that post you will get someone else warned / infracted as might have happened if it had originally been reported but it will not change what you posted and the warning or whatever you got as a result.

No one here is referring to the match thread. The latest incidents were when just panda gifs were deleted. There was no messing involved such as went on in the match thread.

OwaynOTT

I also don't see how using the word sap makes a thread unreadable. The use of the word was not intended as an insult to anyone and as such I don't know why it was lumped in with the panda in receiving a mod warning.

padd b1975

5starpool wrote: »

People being carded for calling their own players names who have done something stupid or missed a chance, etc, is my biggest pet peeve about the SF this season, but I'll be raising that in the soccer feedback thread whenever it gets going.

It's beyond ridiculous and another instance of applying a rule to the totally wrong situation.

Are you honestly expecting a volunteer mod to remember every individual poster's team?

FFS.

Thanx 4 The Fish

Knex. wrote: »

Everyone agrees the panda thing in the match thread was fair, if perhaps the method of dealing with it was a little excessive.

The sap thing was a moderation mistake. It had no business being put in the mod note and then being used as a means to card people. The fact that people still have infractions to their name because of this, is a blot on said mod's copybook, really.

I honestly can't get over that we are having this discussion. Bizarre doesn't do it justice.

Deleting posts without any warning or notification, and then following this up with infractions in the Superthread was also surely less than fair.

Nobody was infracted for panda pictures in the superthread.

Bobeagleburger

Yeah I think the match thread isn't the issue here at all.

The match thread bans were inevitable. There was warnings and then some broke the rules. No can really argue too much.

It's the superthread that's the issue here.

Knex*

padd b1975 wrote: »

Are you honestly expecting a volunteer mod to remember every individual supporter's team?

FFS.

990/1000 its clear as day from the thread they would have said post in. Would it not?

And you'd be surprised at how many you would know. Posting on here for two years, and without regularly venturing outside of the LFC thread (although I am more active now and do on occasion), I'd have a fair idea for a lot of posters on here.

Mods are more active and aware than that again.

Knex*

Thanx 4 The Fish wrote: »

Nobody was infracted for panda pictures in the superthread.

Lloyd got one for linking to this feedback thread. That was a knock on affect from what I was referring to.

LuckyLloyd

Thanx 4 The Fish wrote: »

Nobody was infracted for panda pictures in the superthread.

Your post from the superthread:

Thanx 4 The Fish wrote: »

[Mod Hat]
Feel free, that will get you an infraction though.

Cut out the Pandas, was on the match thread, same rule applies.
[/Mod Hat]

You also deleted posts containing Panda gifs (or well, while I can't be sure you deleted them yourself they were deleted around the time you posted the above)

OwaynOTT

rarnes1 wrote: »

Yeah I think the match thread isn't the issue here at all.

The match thread bans were inevitable. There was warnings and then some broke the rules. No can really argue too much.

It's the superthread that's the issue here.

Someone got carded for asking a question. The cutting out of the panda parade was warranted however but not everything in my view.