Issue with Soccer Forum

RasTa

Chazz Michael Michaels wrote: »

I don't see why they should take personal abuse. Even when they're wrong.

I hate that term personal abuse, can hardly be implied in this situation if the only words used were wanker and f off.

If you look at an old poster Melion, I remember reading one of his appeals and it turned out he had 56 infractions and 7 red's on the whole site and he still wasn't perm banned from the soccer form.

6 months or perm without considering their posting history is too harsh imo.

googled eyes

Deleted User wrote: »

What is the panda.thing about? That they lay around and eat **** all day without consequence...... Like Liverpool fans???

Why?

Knex*

RasTa wrote: »

I hate that term personal abuse, can hardly be implied in this situation if the only words used were wanker and f off.

If you look at an old poster Melion, I remember reading one of his appeals and it turned out he had 56 infractions and 7 red's on the whole site and he still wasn't perm banned from the soccer form.

6 months or perm without considering their posting history is too harsh imo.

Mother of Christ. That's horrendous.

Will I Amnt

And Melion wasn't even that bad :pac:
He learned from his mistakes and was a decent enough poster for a long time before his ban.

Lovely Bloke

Lads, it's sitewide policy that abusing mods is a total no-no - whatever way you frame it, calling a mod a wanker is going to result in sanctions, squeaky clean previous or not. Doesn't matter who the mod is, doesn't matter who the poster is - long term posters should actually know better than to resort to that kind of thing anyway, and actually deserve less leniency than newer posters really.

On to the topic at hand, in-jokes in the team superthread, fine. In-jokes in match threads are extremely annoying, and not long ago an in-joke (again with Liverpool fans) ruined a match thread for me (Man U vs Bayern First Leg, Pool supporters going on and on about some comment someone once made about Sturridge - in a thread that wasn't even about Liverpool, when they were called on it by posters (AFTER mods chose to ignore reported posts re: same), a warning was put on the thread to pretty much protect the same Pool fans, bizarre situation).

Anyway, there seems to have been a warning put on the superthread about posting pandas, that needs to be clarified, but asking for that is probably going to be seen as "hectoring" the mods, which is the usual MO of feedback - stop asking mods/CMods/Admins questions they don't want to answer, if the feel like answering they will, but they are not obliged to and they can just mod as they please, do what they want and aren't answerable to any pleb normal users. Ask the question enough times and it's a decent excuse for some Admin to pop in and close the thread because it's "not going anywhere".

It's clear, mods can do what they want, circle the wagons and just ride the thread out until an Admin closes it, no questions answered, no feedback taken on board, and everyone can just eff off really.

LuckyLloyd

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

Anyway, there seems to have been a warning put on the superthread about posting pandas, that needs to be clarified, but asking for that is probably going to be seen as "hectoring" the mods, which is the usual MO of feedback - stop asking mods/CMods/Admins questions they don't want to answer, if the feel like answering they will, but they are not obliged to and they can just mod as they please, do what they want and aren't answerable to any pleb normal users. Ask the question enough times and it's a decent excuse for some Admin to pop in and close the thread because it's "not going anywhere".

It's clear, mods can do what they want, circle the wagons and just ride the thread out until an Admin closes it, no questions answered, no feedback taken on board, and everyone can just eff off really.

Well I have tried to make the question at core for starting this thread clear and highlighted what needs to be clarified a couple of times. The lack of a clear response is disappointing, but hopefully dfx or T4TF or whoever will get off work or whatever this evening and allow this to get wrapped up.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=89927603&postcount=129

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Here's what I am gleaning from your responses:

- there is a section in the charter that covers the mod team for ruling out of bounds off topic .gifs;
- this will be decided on an adhoc basis and from time to time some picture or gif posting will be adjudged as not allowed (though other similar usage is okay);
- when a mod or mods have made that adhoc decision they will post an on thread warning;
- failure to comply (i.e. to continue posting images) or any questioning of that warning will result in warnings, etc;
- in such a case, the warnings, etc will be technically for back seat modding or refusing to follow a moderators instructions, not the gif rule;

Is that correct?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=89930841&postcount=151

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Great post Sacksian. I agree that the forum is well modded overall.

I would find it acceptable for:

- TRTF to confirm that the warning from last night does not mean panda gifs (or whatever images people find humorous) are out of bounds within the superthread;
- with the usual caveat that those images cannot be NSFW or constitute abuse of a poster or player in such a way that it contravenes those sections of the charter;

And we can move on problem solved.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=89931238&postcount=161

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

That doesn't work though. You can't issue this warning while deleting a panda gif:



And then say 'oh but no-one has got warned or banned for posting Panda gifs' as if that resolves the matter.

- the warning above either applies or it doesn't;
- if it doesn't we need a clear understanding of why it doesn't while other off topic gifs and images can be posted;

You can't have this bizarre position of:

- we say don't post Panda gifs;
- if you post Panda gifs we aren't banning you for that, it's because you failed to follow a moderator's instructions which is long term sitewide policy, etc;

It's a crude form of have your cake and eat it too modding.

Agueroooo

Sacksian wrote: »

I read the Soccer forum daily. I don't post there and don't have access but, despite what a lot of the posters seem to think, it seems to be a really well-moderated forum (especially given the personalities involved).

As a non-partisan reader, it's really entertaining to watch the ebbs and flows of each superthread during the season - and from season to season - as the various clubs rise and fall.

This year, it's the Manchester United superthread's turn to endure what Liverpool's superthread has had for the past few seasons (and Arsenal are next, I'd imagine): bitter feuds between the optimists and the arch-pessimists over just how awful various players, managers and administrators are and all of it fuelled by healthy doses of hearsay, conjecture and prejudice. In other words, good old-fashioned football debates.

Right now, given their history and the last few seasons (and even the prelude to this one), I can't imagine there's any feeling better than being a Liverpool fan.

If I had been a Liverpool fan discussing my team with fellow supporters this past week, I can imagine I would have been beyond delirious. Humour (often surreal humour) is an inextricable part of football culture. As such, and in the context and culture of internet discussion (i.e. animal memes, aimated GIFS, etc), I cannot think of anything more on-topic to a Liverpool superthread than Pandas. It's fans getting giddy with fellow supporters in their own thread.

Generally, the soccer forum mods are excellent. This was a mistake. No big deal. Undo it and move on.

excellent post!

and put across better than I could ever imagine.

Other news...

Can someone clarify if Opr is perma banned or has it been downgraded (fingers crossed) to one month? as the disputes thread is a bit confusing.

keane2097

Why doesn't someone just post a panda gif in the thread and see what happens? Would be more productive than trying to get one of the mods to answer the question without equivocation by the way this has gone to date.

brevity

keane2097 wrote: »

Why doesn't someone just post a panda gif in the thread and see what happens? Would be more productive than trying to get one of the mods to answer the question without equivocation by the way this has gone to date.

I nominate keane2097.

All in favour?

Agueroooo

brevity wrote: »

I nominate keane2097.

All in favour?

*really wants to post a pic of a Panda with hand up

Grayditch

Telling a mod to F off should hold no stronger punishment than if it were directed to a regular user.

I mean, in not sure if it even does, I'm just responding to people who seem to think it's like talking to a Guard or something.

Fair play to the ones the give up their time and do it properly and not drop those patroning warnings, only to be backpatted with thanks from other mods. So cringy.

GavRedKing

Agueroooo wrote: »

excellent post!

and put across better than I could ever imagine.

Other news...

Can someone clarify if Opr is perma banned or has it been downgraded (fingers crossed) to one month? as the disputes thread is a bit confusing.

opr's ban was a site ban for abuse via PM which is a Boards standard 1 month.

Hes serving a permanent ban for the SF forum which will be reviewed in 6 months as Beasty said on the DRP

Knex*

Lads, be honest with us, are we ever getting a proper answer to the questions Lloyd has put forward, at least? Or are we just pissing into the wind here?

I'd like to think we're not wasting time, but I'm a cynical man at heart.

Pro. F

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.

To be fair, that was an extremely understandable mistake. Dfx was dealing with a mess of a match thread very late at night. He picked out all the things he saw that looked like trouble, warned against them and then warned against debating his modding on thread. Then some people debated his modding on thread straight after and he carded them. That course of events seems reasonable to me when you consider how much reading and deciding the mod had to do in a short space of time late at night.

I would guess that on another night somebody would have PM'd Dfx about the "saps" thing instead of arguing in the thread and the use of the term would have, one way or another, returned to the team thread with no real problem for anybody.

I think Lloyd was right to concentrate this thread on the Panda .gifs, that ruling is far more obviously unreasonable because it has been brought directly into the team super thread and the panda .gifs are so clearly harmless.

Knex*

Pro. F wrote: »

To be fair, that was an extremely understandable mistake. Dfx was dealing with a mess of a match thread very late at night. He picked out all the things he saw that looked like trouble, warned against them and then warned against debating his modding on thread. Then some people debated his modding on thread straight after and he carded them. That course of events seems reasonable to me when you consider how much reading and deciding the mod had to do in a short space of time late at night.

I would guess that on another night somebody would have PM'd Dfx about the "saps" thing instead of arguing in the thread and the use of the term would have, one way or another, returned to the team thread with no real problem for anybody.

I think Lloyd was right to concentrate this thread on the Panda .gifs, that ruling is far more obviously unreasonable because it has been brought directly into the team super thread and the panda .gifs are so clearly harmless.

I actually had a few PMs with Bounty Hunter, from whom I got the card, whereby I stated pretty much that and I accepted my card, no issue.

Still though, we're left now with the impression that we can't even use it on our own thread for fear of infractions, and that's ridiculous.

Its all the same issue really, Mods put something ridiculous in bold, nobody actually gets carded for doing it, but we get cards for the site wide, "questioning moderation" thing, as they know its not plausible to give a card for the actual content alone. One incident is T4TF warning in the thread yesterday, the other was one part of dfx's warning in the match thread.

It needs to be cleared up along with the gif issue. I can't see how either could ever be plausibly banned from the super thread, really. I also don't see how the sap reference could ever be banned from any Liverpool match thread, as that is where its most relevant.

K-9

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

(AFTER mods chose to ignore reported posts re: same), a warning was put on the thread to pretty much protect the same Pool fans, bizarre situation).

From my experience of modding Politics and AH, me or another mod making a call from a perceived biased view point wouldn't be long getting pulled up on, if/when it happened. Mods often have disagreements in their internal modding forums about issues, we aren't all robots, and my experience of modding busy forums is that the best interest of the forum is the paramount concern of mods.

Some Soccer fans can be very biased and to be frank, a bit paranoid about opposition fans getting away with this and that, its the nature of the tribal beast!

Just on opr, we've had our heated debates in the past, never found him abusive or a waste of time type poster. The abuse seems to have come from genuine frustration at the issue. I'd like to think in my own modding I'd give a bit of leeway with a poster like that, and maybe in a day or 2 when heads are calmer we'd come to an agreement, and reduce the term as a gesture of goodwill and giving the poster the benefit of the doubt because of his long term record.

Good posters will appreciate the thought and consideration, others well, they'll end up with long or perma bans in the end anyway!

Obviously as a Liverpool fan (sorry for the in joke) I'm a bit biased, but carrying the rule from a match thread over to the super thread seems a bit overkill. The point about WWE/WWF is a good one, its hard to refute the logic tbh, and I don't get wrestling references at all! There's an in joke about Kate Cohen that's nearly 2 years old at this stage and still gets referenced regularly!

LiamO mentioned it and the thought crept into my mind before seeing his post, bans from specific team match threads that carry over for the rest of the season would do no harm at all. Wouldn't be that hard to keep a record of it, I'd say it would only concern maybe 7/8 posters at most anyway. It removes what seems to be a big reason that those select posters use the forum for.

As John Cleese said: "How much do you hate the Romans?"

Peasant: "A Lot."

"Your in then".

K-9

Oh the Sap thing seems very harsh, hell its a joke taking the piss out of us sad baxtards who post in match threads while watching the match! If we can't take the piss out of ourselves it doesn't say much for the oft quoted "banter" in the soccer forum.

Blatter

K-9 wrote: »

Just on opr, we've had our heated debates in the past, never found him abusive or a waste of time type poster. The abuse seems to have come from genuine frustration at the issue. I'd like to think in my own modding I'd give a bit of leeway with a poster like that, and maybe in a day or 2 when heads are calmer we'd come to an agreement, and reduce the term as a gesture of goodwill and giving the poster the benefit of the doubt because of his long term record.

Good posters will appreciate the thought and consideration, others well, they'll end up with long or perma bans in the end anyway!

I'd like to hear the opinions of the soccer mods on this.

I can't imagine that many of them would disagree. It'd be nonsensical if a reasonable compromise can't be reached in this situation instead of a 6 month blanket ban before anything can be discussed.

GavRedKing

Knex. wrote: »

Lads, be honest with us, are we ever getting a proper answer to the questions Lloyd has put forward, at least? Or are we just pissing into the wind here?

I'd like to think we're not wasting time, but I'm a cynical man at heart.

I know i said last night about 12.30/1 to Beasty that i was going to leave it until tomorrow to get an answer together and I'll go back to the mod team and Beasty this afternoon at work and try get an answer to LL's points in due course this evening.

I'm in and out of training courses all day in work so its hard enough to take a detailed look at whats being mentioned in a quick moving thread and last night I didnt see the Feedback thread until fairly late.

LiamoSail

OPR reacted wrongly, but surely a poster of 10 years who's contribution has been largely positive can be forgiven for an over reaction to what was a strange decision by the mods.

The line about him having to prove he can behave in the future was bad form too IMO. Do the previous ten years not demonstrate that?

LuckyLloyd

Blatter wrote: »

I'd like to hear the opinions of the soccer mods on this.

I can't imagine that many of them would disagree. It'd be nonsensical if a reasonable compromise can't be reached in this situation instead of a 6 month blanket ban before anything can be discussed.

This was a bit strange imo:

Beasty wrote:

Secondly I would expect yopu to show you can be a positive and constructive poster for an extended period (and I mean a minimum of 6 months before I would ever consider it)

Opr has a decade of constructive posting to his name!! Seems like a freak exception in his posting history, and I'd have little doubt that he would return to being a brilliant soccer forum contributor were he to return. Hopefully it can be reviewed at some point in the future.

Knex*

GavRedKing wrote: »

I know i said last night about 12.30/1 to Beasty that i was going to leave it until tomorrow to get an answer together and I'll go back to the mod team and Beasty this afternoon at work and try get an answer to LL's points in due course this evening.

I'm in and out of training courses all day in work so its hard enough to take a detailed look at whats being mentioned in a quick moving thread and last night I didnt see the Feedback thread until fairly late.

Cheers Gav. My apologies, had kinda forgotten about that what with the rate of posts on here and not much answers, so had thought (wrongly) that it was getting swept under the carpet.

Appreciate your time on the matter, so I'll back out of this thread for a while now until ye have some time to gather a response.

LiamoSail

GavRedKing wrote: »

I'm in and out of training courses all day in work so its hard enough to take a detailed look at whats being mentioned in a quick moving thread and last night I didnt see the Feedback thread until fairly late.

You'd probably have seen it earlier if the link that was kindly posted in the SF hadn't been deleted :pac:

GavRedKing

LiamoSail wrote: »

OPR reacted wrongly, but surely a poster of 10 years who's contribution has been largely positive can be forgiven for an over reaction to what was a strange decision by the mods.

The line about him having to prove he can behave in the future was bad form too IMO. Do the previous ten years not demonstrate that?

I dont want to drag this to far off topic but as LL started this thread for an answer to his issue, maybe OPR's is for another discussion and maybe between the mods and CMod involved and not in the open forum.

GavRedKing

LiamoSail wrote: »

You'd probably have seen it earlier if the link that was kindly posted in the SF hadn't been deleted :pac:

I was on mobile from 1pm until about midnight so until I sat down at the PC and answered a few PM's alot of what happened yesterday went over my head, anyone thats tries to Mod from a mobile will tell ya its a pain so unless I've access to a laptop or PC at the time.

Grayditch

With all the issues with mods flying around, I hope the good mods know how much it's appreciated when things are done well.

That GavRedKing guy should host a Mod Training course "Good Modding with Gav". I hope he doesn't read this, it'd be mortifying.

GavRedKing

Grayditch wrote: »

With all the issues with mods flying around, I hope the good mods know how much it's appreciated when things are done well.

That GavRedKing guy should host a Mod Training course "Good Modding with Gav". I hope he doesn't read this, it'd be mortifying.

Aaaww you guys

FWIW, I've probably the worse record of any of the current mods so I dont think I'm exactly the best to be dishing out courses. :pac:

I just try and be as active and engaging as possible and as I said I'll try get LL an answer to his issue in the next few hours and if its not satisfactory then we can deal with it when and if that is the case.

LiamoSail

GavRedKing wrote: »

I dont want to drag this to far off topic but as LL started this thread for an answer to his issue, maybe OPR's is for another discussion and maybe between the mods and CMod involved and not in the open forum.

Apologies, didn't mean to detract from the initial issues raised

GavRedKing

LiamoSail wrote: »

Apologies, didn't mean to detract from the initial issues raised

No problem guys, its just probably easier for us to deal with LL's issue right now.

OPR, as hes serving a ban doesnt have a chance to defend himself or make an input so its probably not fair for us to drag his ban into it at this time.

Its not kicking it down the road per se, we can talk about OPRs ban when his ban is up but until then I'd like to get through LL's issue.

Bounty Hunter

Knex. wrote: »

I actually had a few PMs with Bounty Hunter, from whom I got the card, whereby I stated pretty much that and I accepted my card, no issue.

You did and fair play to you for accepting it and in general fair play to all for accepting that the joke had gone too far in that thread because it did and action needed to be taken.

The OPR situation (personally don't think his actions are defendable but his record / the punishment etc...)along with others where people want to throw their issues into this thread should be dealt with elsewhere imho.

I think it's quite surprising to be honest that the "in joke" only got explained (for many at least) when I asked outright what it was all about several pages into a feedback thread. Perhaps if when the issue arose in the superthread (the one people do seem to have an issue with the mod action related to gifs, although yep its not the gifs but the ignoring the warning people got warned over) someone had pmd the mod in question and explained the issue he could have re-evaluated his position.

Not saying he would or even should but surely you should try a dialogue with the mods before the situation escalates no matter what the situation.