Feedback thread 2014

GavRedKing

Its that time of the year again where you get to have your say.

Few things before we get going :

As with the usual Feedback Threads, any trolling, abuse or breaches of the charter in this thread will be an immediate infraction and 2 week ban for anyone who breaches the rules. If you want to post in this thread you are agreeing to accept this rule, we want this thread to run smoothly as its all in yere vested interests.

Couple of basic ground rules before we get going:

(1) No scapegoating of individual posters or Moderators. This isn't to turn into a witch hunt against people you don't like. This isnt a point scoring thread, this is yere chance to tell us what we should or should not be doing.

(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 not be tolerated. Most 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 instead of dragging the thread wildly off topic.


(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 as Mods 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 so if you want to make a point about consistencies, or lack there of, in Moderation please try and do so without singling out Mods for abuse. Also please note that the charter is only a guideline to be used by ALL of us, its not a set of concrete rules, if it was it would have its own forum, and as such, we as Moderators try and use our best interpretation of these rules to apply to the every day running of the forum.

(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. This is your chance to have your say so if you have an issue and you think it needs to be resolved mention it, but please remember this isnt a place to grind your axe, try be constructive in your input.


(5) Let's have a grown up discussion and please note this thread has a 1 week life span it will be shut on Saturday 31st so we can look at suggestions and try and implement what you guys want ASAP, preferably before the forum gets busy again for the WC.

So get cracking, good, bad or indifferent, we'll take as much constructive inputs as possible under suggestion.

Agueroooo

For me:

1.] Match threads to have a specified life span cause imo they cause more infractions when they are running for days after the actual event.

2.] Just like the slag names for managers etc has been fiercely policed..I wouldn't mind the same being applied for posts like 'always the victims' etc.

Edit:
3.] The 'acting the dick' rule needs to be given more teeth and maybe clarified with no excuses attached.

apart from that I think the place is doing OK

The_Kew_Tour

1 suggestion which I know won't happen but anyway

Get rid of football charter

Have 1 rule

"Dont be a Dick"

If you are you get warning then yellow and so on

Would make mods life much easier too lets be honest.

Darkglasses

Agueroooo wrote: »

For me:

1.] Match threads to have a specified life span cause imo they cause more infractions when they are running for days after the actual event.

2.] Just like the slag names for managers etc has been fiercely policed..I wouldn't mind the same being applied for posts like 'always the victims' etc.

Edit:
3.] The 'acting the dick' rule needs to be given more teeth and maybe clarified with no excuses attached.

apart from that I think the place is doing OK

I kind of like your first suggestion..Although I'm not sure there needs to be a specific rule about it. I think maybe we should just be more prone to closing them before they go off-track? Although maybe when they've gone on for days after match, they're bound to have gone off track by that stage.

For number 3, the "don't be a dick" rule is a site-wide thing and isn't something we can change in this thread, unless there's something in our charter you're referring to that I'm not seeing?

Mars Bar

Match threads need a 48 hours anyway to give people a chance to contribute to the thread that might have travelled to the game. I think after 48 hours or 72, it can be closed. I'd be okay with that anyway.

As for the "don't be a dick" rule. Yeah, it's the motto of boards.ie in a way but some people just don't know when they're being a dick and you need the rules to point it out to them. The charter is an aide to the mods (well, it is for me anyway) and not a hinderance (for the most part).

Agueroooo

Darkglasses wrote: »

For number 3, the "don't be a dick" rule is a site-wide thing and isn't something we can change in this thread, unless there's something in our charter you're referring to that I'm not seeing?

It was more got to do with trying and stamp out the continuous posts that add nothing to a topic, or match.

One word, or sentences that are only posted to antagonise.

Basically someone acting the dick.

TheTownie

Agueroooo wrote: »

For me:

1.] Match threads to have a specified life span cause imo they cause more infractions when they are running for days after the actual event.

2.] Just like the slag names for managers etc has been fiercely policed..I wouldn't mind the same being applied for posts like 'always the victims' etc.

Edit:
3.] The 'acting the dick' rule needs to be given more teeth and maybe clarified with no excuses attached.

apart from that I think the place is doing OK

On point 1;

Would that not just encourage people to take their match grievances into the super-threads. I think people would rather see a match thread derailed than a super-thread derailed.

Will I Amnt

I've already outlined my suggestion in the thread that was in the Feedback forum. In fairness I haven't seen it happen since but I'll leave it here anyway...

Quoting/referencing posts in one thread and posting them somewhere else for the sole purpose of "pointing" and laughing.
If you're not prepared to reply in the thread where you see it, don't piss off somewhere else to bitch about it.

Agueroooo

TheTownie wrote: »

On point 1;

Would that not just encourage people to take their match grievances into the super-threads. I think people would rather see a match thread derailed than a super-thread derailed.

That's my exact point.
On many occasions the discussion about the match is well a truly over and for hours on end there is nothing more than mickey waving and baiting going on.

If say a match thread was to run for no longer than 30hrs after the FT whistle then it's guaranteed that posters would be back in their super threads/holes (I jest)

TheTownie

Agueroooo wrote: »

That's my exact point.
On many occasions the discussion about the match is well a truly over and for hours on end there is nothing more than mickey waving and baiting going on.

If say a match thread was to run for no longer than 30hrs after the FT whistle then it's guaranteed that posters would be back in their super threads/holes (I jest)

I'm for keeping people crying over match incidents in the match thread thank you very much then after say 48/72 hours close it, like Mars Bar said.

If you acting the dick consistantly the card system should be bypassed and the user should be perma-banned.

Washington Irving

Consistency.

In my opinion, as much as I think Cole is a bit of a prat

Fair play to Chelsea, hate their style of play and Jose is a prat but that's a great team display.

Hodgson is the bigger prat. But Moyes' quotes weren't too far off.

The prat missed a sitter.

I'd take someone like Remy over Balotelli. More reliable, cheaper and less of a complete prat.

Clattenberg made Arteta re-take a penalty last week for encroachment. The prat.

One of the above posts resulted in a warning, the rest, unless off thread action was taken, went unactioned. Now I don't think any of them should have drawn attention from mods, as there does not appear to be any malice behind them, but if one is deemed to be in breach of the charter why aren't they all?

The above is just an example of something I've noticed. There have been situations where one post/set of posts results in bans/warnings for a user while a similar post appears to get away with it. Is this due to certain posts being reported and encouraging mod action while other posts don't seem to offend anyone and are therefore ok? Do users' previous records work against them while others are given the benefit of the doubt? Are some mods more lenient while others are more trigger happy (I won't name names)? Something else?

This comes up every year, but there is just too much of a grey area.



Agree with Agueroooo's point above regarding enforcement of the "don't be a dick" rule. There are countless example of users skirting the rules to deliberately wind up other posters which that rule should be preventing.

alchemist33

Match threads to be confined to the match in question, rather than comments about (or supposedly-vague-but-really-quite-clear-references-to) players or teams not involved.

Darkglasses

rarnes1 wrote: »

If you acting the dick consistantly the card system should be bypassed and the user should be perma-banned.

I'm not sure I understand...The totting up system we have is in place in order to deal with people who are breaking rules consistently. How would you change it?

From last year's feedback thread this is what resulted from the discussion - http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=85791306&postcount=501

Darkglasses

Darkglasses wrote: »

I'm not sure I understand...The totting up system we have is in place in order to deal with people who are breaking rules consistently. How would you change it?

From last year's feedback thread this is what resulted from the discussion - http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=85791306&postcount=501

Personally I think it's too lenient.

3 yellows and you're back in 2 weeks? 4 in a month?

Anyone can pick up a yellow or two. But 4/5 and be back posting that soon isn't harsh enough imo. 5 chances is far too many.


How would I change it?

1 - Warning
2 - Week
3 - Month
4 - 3 months
5 - Season ban / 6 months

Tbh, that's still leniant imo! If you can't abide by the rules, post elsewhere.

Will I Amnt

rarnes1 wrote: »

Personally I think it's too lenient.

3 yellows and you're back in 2 weeks? 4 in a month?

Anyone can pick up a yellow or two. But 4/5 and be back posting that soon isn't harsh enough imo. 5 chances is far too many.


How would I change it?

1 - Warning
2 - Week
3 - Month
4 - 3 months
5 - Season ban / 6 months

Tbh, that's still leniant imo! If you can't abide by the rules, post elsewhere.

That's almost the same as the old way before the last feedback thread.

GavRedKing

Washington Irving wrote: »

Consistency.





One of the above posts resulted in a warning, the rest, unless off thread action was taken, went unactioned. Now I don't think any of them should have drawn attention from mods, as there does not appear to be any malice behind them, but if one is deemed to be in breach of the charter why aren't they all?

The above is just an example of something I've noticed. There have been situations where one post/set of posts results in bans/warnings for a user while a similar post appears to get away with it. Is this due to certain posts being reported and encouraging mod action while other posts don't seem to offend anyone and are therefore ok? Do users' previous records work against them while others are given the benefit of the doubt? Are some mods more lenient while others are more trigger happy (I won't name names)? Something else?

This comes up every year, but there is just too much of a grey area.



Agree with Agueroooo's point above regarding enforcement of the "don't be a dick" rule. There are countless example of users skirting the rules to deliberately wind up other posters which that rule should be preventing.

Only problem is though, if none of the above posts were reported the chances are we wont see them. We cant action what isnt reported as the threads move so quickly l, even if a mod is posting in said thread he/she may miss an actionable post.
read he/she may miss an actionable post.

Darkglasses

GavRedKing wrote: »

Only problem is though, if none of the above posts were reported the chances are we wont see them. We cant action what isnt reported as the threads move so quickly l, even if a mod is posting in said thread he/she may miss an actionable post.
read he/she may miss an actionable post.

As far as I can tell (by inputting the quoted text into the search of our reported posts forum), none of those were reported? The 8 of us cannot get through every post and spend the time necessary to moderate them unless posts get reported.

GavRedKing

GavRedKing wrote: »

Only problem is though, if none of the above posts were reported the chances are we wont see them. We cant action what isnt reported as the threads move so quickly l, even if a mod is posting in said thread he/she may miss an actionable post.
read he/she may miss an actionable post.

Mods can though, can't they? If they see a post?

Washington Irving

rarnes1 wrote: »

Personally I think it's too lenient.

3 yellows and you're back in 2 weeks? 4 in a month?

Anyone can pick up a yellow or two. But 4/5 and be back posting that soon isn't harsh enough imo. 5 chances is far too many.


How would I change it?

1 - Warning
2 - Week
3 - Month
4 - 3 months
5 - Season ban / 6 months

Tbh, that's still leniant imo! If you can't abide by the rules, post elsewhere.

To be honest I think that's a bit harsh. It's far too easy to pick up a few yellows when regularly contributing over the course of a year without ever posting anything malicious or deliberately breaking rules.

Perhaps something could be put in place for multiple yellows in a shorter length of time. I don't think someone who picks up 3 yellows over 2000 SF posts between August and May should be as quick to be banned as someone who came in April, posted 20 times and got 3 warnings.

Darkglasses

rarnes1 wrote: »

Mods can though, can't they? If they see a post?

If we see it, yes we can, but the chances of us seeing it decreases drastically if it's not reported. 8 people giving up time around jobs/family can't cover everything in the forum. If people reported what they see more often, I think it'd improve the forum hugely.

Dozen Wicked Words

Match thread duration after the game has been mentioned, a limit to how many days in advance of a game threads could be started might help. Some start days before games and just become an extension of super threads cliques and their in-jokes as a result.



If there is already a limit, apologies, go about your business people, nothing to see here.

GavRedKing

rarnes1 wrote: »

Mods can though, can't they? If they see a post?

Oh ya, if we see aomething we can and have done but reported posts help us pin point the trouble makers and their posts
We're not all active in all threads so our scope isnt all inclusive throughout the forum unfortunately.

GavRedKing

GavRedKing wrote: »

Oh ya, if we see aomething we can and have done but reported posts help us pin point the trouble makers and their posts
We're not all active in all threads so our scope isnt all inclusive throughout the forum unfortunately.

I know that Gav. I had presumed that you could action a post not reported, just wanted clarification

GavRedKing

rarnes1 wrote: »

I know that Gav. I had presumed that you could action a post not reported, just wanted clarification

No problem. that being said, we dont go stalking the forum looking to action posts and card people.

dfx-

Washington Irving wrote: »

To be honest I think that's a bit harsh. It's far too easy to pick up a few yellows when regularly contributing over the course of a year without ever posting anything malicious or deliberately breaking rules.

Perhaps something could be put in place for multiple yellows in a shorter length of time. I don't think someone who picks up 3 yellows over 2000 SF posts between August and May should be as quick to be banned as someone who came in April, posted 20 times and got 3 warnings.

I can see why you think its harsh. The original change was to remove the two card ban as people were picking up one card in August and one 11 months later in July and getting banned and also to extend the 5 card ban.

New users do also have a probation period of 3 months in which they will be banned for three months should they pick up a red card or three yellows - a substantial penalty compared to a full season poster for the same tally of offences.

kryogen

As I consistently say, what I would like to see most around here, is greater consistency from moderators

The forum has got to be an absolute nightmare to keep in check and I can only imagine how much worse it would be if you didn't need to be granted access here before posting, I understand they are people, and people interpret things differently, react differently to situations and of course that they are doing the job in their free time and on a voluntary basis

I would like to see guidelines set down for mods that is not open to interpretation from them, if a post is worthy of an infraction, infract it, if it isn't, don't. Don't go back through a posters history to find posts that may be card worthy either as that is a bit against the site wide Dont be a Dick policy in fairness, looking for an excuse to infract certain posters you don't like is a little sad and pretty unfair given the powers that go with moderation.

My main issue is that we see it far too often, a post gets a yellow from a mod while others no more or less deserving get nothing, even when reported as I have experimented with it myself to test it out.

It contributes to breeding an atmosphere where it appears some posters get treated more favourably then others, or fans of a certain team get better or worse treatment from certain mods etc

I feel the standards have slipped in the last while, not going to blame any individual for it, the grievances I have and the issues many other posters have and have had with mods and the forum are well documented at this stage so I don't think I should go into specifics here

There is a pretty good community feel to the place still thankfully, and that is probably the main reason I am still around. Even with opposition fans, the gentle wind ups and general conversation is great, of course people over step the mark now and then and things get heated, you get dicks just being dicks, but the plenty of users here are great, and it would be a shame to keep losing good contributors in the coming year

Vinz Mesrine

Something needs to be done about the blatant trolling and fishing in certain threads. A lot of users know just how to do it while staying within the rules, they march into a thread, cause an argument and leave again, they go unpunished but if someone reacts they get a card or worse.

We all know who the posters are, it's ridiculous.

Soups123

Vinz Mesrine wrote: »

Something needs to be done about the blatant trolling and fishing in certain threads. A lot of users know just how to do it while staying within the rules, they march into a thread, cause an argument and leave again, they go unpunished but if someone reacts they get a card or worse.

We all know who the posters are, it's ridiculous.

This is my biggest issue in here, the last 6/8 months it's been non stop almost every thread is derailed by the same posters every time. Maybe enough people don't report posts myself included but it's making this place more about tit for tat than football discussion.

No issue with the overall moderation I think it's done well

Benimar

Vinz Mesrine wrote: »

Something needs to be done about the blatant trolling and fishing in certain threads. A lot of users know just how to do it while staying within the rules, they march into a thread, cause an argument and leave again, they go unpunished but if someone reacts they get a card or worse.

We all know who the posters are, it's ridiculous.

100% agree.

I'm not the most regular poster and only post in certain threads, but I could easily name the posters that are just on the wind up, its that obvious. Mods can't monitor 24/7 but I do feel they could do more about these type of posters...we all know who they are!

Soft Falling Rain

Vinz Mesrine wrote: »

Something needs to be done about the blatant trolling and fishing in certain threads. A lot of users know just how to do it while staying within the rules, they march into a thread, cause an argument and leave again, they go unpunished but if someone reacts they get a card or worse.

We all know who the posters are, it's ridiculous.

That's not a new issue. Unfortunately though it can prove quite difficult to action for the mods.

For it to change, well, you'd be depending on the posters in question to change their behaviour. To not be ***** basically. It won't happen (it comes natural to some people).

Vinz Mesrine

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

That's not a new issue. Unfortunately though it can prove quite difficult to action for the mods.

For it to change, well, you'd be depending on the posters in question to change their behaviour. To not be ***** basically. It won't happen (it comes natural to some people).

If i can spot it and can name the main culprits who do it constantly then surely to god the moderators can see it too. In my opinion, it's a simple thing to moderate.

djPSB

Sub forums for the bigger Superthreads i.e Man Utd, Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool.

These threads move incredibly quick and in most instances the same topics get discussed over and over.

Would be nice if each had their own forum and they could be broken down into threads by topic e.g. Summer transfer window, match threads, threads on individual players etc.

LiamoSail

There was an issue with the locking of a thread recently which I found entirely out of order. A thread, which hadn't been violating the charter was locked without so much as a explanation as to why. When a similar thread was started, it was again locked with a mod stating they didn't know why the original was locked, but they were locking this one. My issue is that it's just ignorant locking a thread without explanation, or identifying who locked it, and creates unnecessary animosity

The mod that locked the second thread then did absolutely eff all to ascertain why the original was locked. What are we then expected to do? PM every forum mod to check who locked it and why? Why did the second mod not just question it on the mod forum? Do the mods want 7/8 posters PMing them all asking who locked whatever thread? Seems daft to me, and as with the above, puts the mods in the role of Police rather than posters contributing to the building and bettering of the forum.

The thread in question was the thread on how Celtic and Scottish football in general was fairing without Rangers.

First thread

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057169359&page=2

Second thread

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=89481339


I'd like to know why the mod who locked the first thread didn't explain the decision or identify themselves, and why the second mod, after going to the hassle of locking the second thread, didn't follow up on why the first thread was locked. Would seem to be an issue of basic courtesy to me.

By and large however, I believe the mods do a difficult job well, and in any dealing I have had with mods,have always felt they handled situations fairly

Kess73

Vinz Mesrine wrote: »

If i can spot it and can name the main culprits who do it constantly then surely to god the moderators can see it too. In my opinion, it's a simple thing to moderate.

It is not a simple thing to moderate. Many posters of that ilk will post in a manner that stays onside in terms of the charter, and as such would also be able to get any card/ban overturned using the DRP.



I could make a list of posters that I think are only out to stir just as easily as you could, but if they do not go against the forum charter in an obvious fashion, then any mod action can be easily overturned using the DRP and that poster is them free to post again in the same fashion.


What mods have to do is look back at that posters history in the forum, and see if there is a pattern to that poster's posting style, and that is something that some posters seem to want mods not to do.

The thing about checking back through a poster's history that may get missed by regular forums users is that it is something that rarely sees action taken based on one mod's opinion. If a poster's post history is seen as showing a track record of a certain type of behaviour, then it does get discussed by the mods as a group and the Cmods also look over what gets said. Then, if there is agreement on a poster, action gets taken.

It is a system that offers posters protection from any one mod going "rogue", as the other soccer mods (not to mention the Cmods and admin that use the soccer mod forum) all get to comment on a course of action, and any actions taken against serial offenders will have been open to imput from all the soccer mods, all the sports Cmods, and the admin.


I do agree that it must be frustrating for posters who just want to enjoy the forum to see stirrers who just about stay on the right side of the charter, but it can be just as frustrating for the mods to be fairly certain that Poster X is on a wind up but that poster not doing enough to warrant a card.

Vinz Mesrine

I won't quote your post Kess, it'll take up too much screen space

What is DRP? Forgive my stupidity.

Surely if yourself and the other mods are able to list off these repeat offenders then something should be able to be done about it. I understand they are able to play on the rules and ensure that no one post is enough to warrant a card, but then shouldn't there be a totting up process?

If a poster is out mainly to disrupt decent discussion and troll certain threads on a constant basis then surely that goes against the "Don't be a dick" ethos of the forum.

Beasty

Vinz Mesrine wrote: »

Something needs to be done about the blatant trolling and fishing in certain threads. A lot of users know just how to do it while staying within the rules, they march into a thread, cause an argument and leave again, they go unpunished but if someone reacts they get a card or worse.

We all know who the posters are, it's ridiculous.

Soups123 wrote: »

This is my biggest issue in here, the last 6/8 months it's been non stop almost every thread is derailed by the same posters every time. Maybe enough people don't report posts myself included but it's making this place more about tit for tat than football discussion.

No issue with the overall moderation I think it's done well

Benimar wrote: »

100% agree.

I'm not the most regular poster and only post in certain threads, but I could easily name the posters that are just on the wind up, its that obvious. Mods can't monitor 24/7 but I do feel they could do more about these type of posters...we all know who they are!

If you think this is happening report it. If they go into a thread with the intent of causing an argument that's trolling. Yes showing intent is an issue, and isolated cases may not be actioned, but if someone shows a pattern of such behaviour the mods will act but only if they are aware of it.

The mods can't second guess everyone, and as has already been pointed out it is simply not possible for them to read every single post in the forum. I don't have time read maybe over half the posts in the forum I moderate and that gets perhaps 20-30% of the traffic the Soccer Forum gets

padd b1975

No whinging on superthreads when your team/players is getting both barrels on the humour thread.

It's a sneaky method of getting around the 'no chat' rule.

Beasty

Vinz Mesrine wrote: »

What is DRP? Forgive my stupidity.

Dispute Resolution Process

Vinz Mesrine wrote: »

Surely if yourself and the other mods are able to list off these repeat offenders then something should be able to be done about it. I understand they are able to play on the rules and ensure that no one post is enough to warrant a card, but then shouldn't there be a totting up process?

If a poster is out mainly to disrupt decent discussion and troll certain threads on a constant basis then surely that goes against the "Don't be a dick" ethos of the forum.

The rules cater for this sort of behaviour. However the mods need to see the pattern I've already alluded to. In addition some posters seem to take offence at specific posters posting in "their" superthread. That in itself is not an issue. If they do so to be disruptive, and the mods agree they are doing so, the process outlined by Kess will catch them out, but only if the mods are told about them in the first place (which is where reporting posts comes into it again)

Mars Bar

Beasty wrote: »

If you think this is happening report it. If they go into a thread with the intent of causing an argument that's trolling.

Also, let's not confuse this with a poster trying to start a genuine debate in an opposition thread. Just because you don't agree with their opinion doesn't automatically make them a troll.

EDIT: Beasty said it better than me above I think!

Beasty

Beasty wrote: »

Dispute Resolution Process

The rules cater for this sort of behaviour. However the mods need to see the pattern I've already alluded to. In addition some posters seem to take offence at specific posters posting in "their" superthread. That in itself is not an issue. If they do so to be disruptive, and the mods agree they are doing so, the process outlined by Kess will catch them out, but only if the mods are told about them in the first place (which is where reporting posts comes into it again)

Perhaps carding posters that complain about posters coming into "their" threads would stop this?

Happens quite a bit and from the same posters everytime

Vinz Mesrine

Mars Bar wrote: »

Also, let's not confuse this with a poster trying to start a genuine debate in an opposition thread. Just because you don't agree with their opinion doesn't automatically make them a troll.

EDIT: Beasty said it better than me above I think!

That's another problem. I have gone into "other" team threads for a discussion, because I like talking about football. I am repeatedly called a troll because I have an opinion that may go against the grain, I have had plenty of decent discussions in the United thread with reasoned posters but it's the same every time when someone comes in accusing me of being a troll and the discussion I was having ends abruptly as other posters jump on that theory.

I even received a card for it in the arsenal thread iirc. I'm a grown man with kids who has watched all levels of football for 25+ years , the last thing I want to be doing is starting pathetic arguments on an Internet forum.

Will I Amnt

rarnes1 wrote: »

Perhaps carding posters that complain about posters coming into "their" threads would stop this?

Happens quite a bit and from the same posters everytime

Bit of a grey area, I've no problem with opposition posters coming into a superthread but I've often reminded them of how they used to react when the same thing happened in "their" thread.

Soups123

Beasty wrote: »

If you think this is happening report it. If they go into a thread with the intent of causing an argument that's trolling. Yes showing intent is an issue, and isolated cases may not be actioned, but if someone shows a pattern of such behaviour the mods will act but only if they are aware of it.

The mods can't second guess everyone, and as has already been pointed out it is simply not possible for them to read every single post in the forum. I don't have time read maybe over half the posts in the forum I moderate and that gets perhaps 20-30% of the traffic the Soccer Forum gets

That's far enough tbh I think only the report post function will sort this, problem is a lot of people don't want to be petty and report it. I don't expect moderators to spot it unless they are in the thread discussion so it's a difficult task but for me one that is really destroying discussion.

I think Kess's post is spot on. For me the same posters are in and out spoiling most threads but in a way that stays within the boundaries of the rules.

Will I Amnt

Will I Amnt wrote: »

Bit of a grey area, I've no problem with opposition posters coming into a superthread but I've often reminded them of how they used to react when the same thing happened in "their" thread.

Not a grey area at all.

Come into any other superthread and debate with the posters there. Same as any forum on boards.

Come in and act the díck and expect to be carded.

Fairly clear cut to me anyway.

Soft Falling Rain

Mars Bar wrote: »

Also, let's not confuse this with a poster trying to start a genuine debate in an opposition thread. Just because you don't agree with their opinion doesn't automatically make them a troll.

EDIT: Beasty said it better than me above I think!

I was once asked in the Liverpool thread what my "game" and "angle" was, and I'm a Liverpool fan ffs! It makes me uncomfortable when I see a minority opinion being jumped on with cries of troll.

Soups123

There's no coincidence that most of these joining a team thread discussion is on the back of something disappointing that particular day for that particular team. And like above troll within the rules.

Coming in for reasoned discussion on any given day shouldn't be an issue but it's very obvious in the first post what the posters intention is

Benimar

Beasty wrote: »

The mods can't second guess everyone, and as has already been pointed out it is simply not possible for them to read every single post in the forum. I don't have time read maybe over half the posts in the forum I moderate and that gets perhaps 20-30% of the traffic the Soccer Forum gets

My post alluded to the fact that it isn't necessary to read every single post. I certainly don't but can spot the posters we are talking about a mile off.

Yes, posts should be reported, but surely if a Mod sees an obvious wind up (and some practically scream wind up) they should be able to nip it in the bud without the post being reported? Even the 'post in this thread again and I'll ban you for a week/month/to damnation and back' type warning tends to be enough.

Will it catch everyone? No. Will some obvious WUMs slip through the net? Definitely. But it shouldn't stop the stricter enforcement of the 'don't be a dick rule' by Mods, just because it won't catch them all.

Will I Amnt

rarnes1 wrote: »

Not a grey area at all.

Come into any other superthread and debate with the posters there. Same as any forum on boards.

Come in and act the díck and expect to be carded.

Fairly clear cut to me anyway.

I was talking about your suggestion of carding posters complaining about opposition fans in the superthreads.

Eg: There's a few posters that come in to the United superthread with a link to every article they come across that shows the club or a player in a negative light, often after it's been discussed at length in the thread already. It's quite obvious what they're up to when it's so regular and it's all they do. They know they're not breaking any rules.

By your suggestion the poster that complains about it gets carded. That's the grey area I'm talking about.

darced

This post has been deleted.

keith16

I enjoy the Soccer Forum and think it is running well.

Mods have a difficult job, but I think it's a job they are doing very well.