Feedback thread 2014

MagicIRL

Mars Bar wrote: »

If you click on the yellow card you'll see "breach of forum charter" and you can go to the charter and find which rule has been broken.

I've had enough cards myself and I didn't even know that was a thing. Brilliant. Forget I was ever here... :cool:

Pro. F

When you click on the yellow in that post all it says, other than dates, is "N/A".

Mars Bar

Under the dates you'll see a heading called Administrative Notes and the reason is underneath.

Pro. F

Mars Bar wrote: »

Under the dates you'll see a heading called Administrative Notes and the reason is underneath.

I can't see that. The headings I see are:

- Active Warning
- Expires
- Left by

And then beyond that is just the footer of the page.

I can't remember when there is an explanation if it's in the active warning bit or if there's another heading for it.

Mars Bar

That's weird! What skin are you on?

Mickeroo

Mars Bar wrote: »

That's weird! What skin are you on?

It's possible mods see more than regular users when the click the cards

5starpool

Mickeroo wrote: »

It's possible mods see more than regular users when the click the cards

They do. We see very little.

Benimar

dfx- wrote: »

What happens when posters continue to discuss X after that point?

I really don't know why there is so much difficulty with the Mods understanding what is being said here.

The issue is with people posting about a topic after the Mod banned talk of it, BUT the Mod had no right to impose the ban as the discussion was on-topic and within the charter. Its a very specific instance and I agree 100% with earlier posters that carding a poster in this case if unjust. The Mods are carding people for ignoring their instruction, but they had no right to issue such an instruction in the first place!

This issue isn't with disobeying a Mod instruction, its about a Mod overstepping their powers and banning posting about a player/topic with no justification.

Lovely Bloke

yeah, mods see more stuff than plebs

Agueroooo

that was quick.

RasTa

I thought the popcorn gif being a card was gone from the last feedback thread.

When will the mods answered my question on why ManYoo is allowed?

Lovely Bloke

Agueroooo wrote: »

that was quick.

very

Bounty Hunter

MagicIRL wrote: »

In order for everything to get on nice and rosey, the moderators must take their own personal opinion out of issues. The original complaint was mods stepping in to stop something that wasn't against the charter (see the Dwight Gale example earlier in the thread) and people being carded as a result.

Personally I would see that example as outside of what was originally brought up as it has its own seperate thread and therefore is most likely just considered an inoffensive bit of fun that can't be off topic as it is it's own topic. In fact I would think that if we looked for cases of what was originally brought up as an issue i.e the bit before someone could be actioned as a result of ignoring mod instruction they would actually be pretty few and far between (the most obvious one even had its own feedback thread so should not be an issue anymore nor need bringing up) and most would be a result of human error which as much as we would like to we cannot eradicate.

Assuming this was sorted out, with a few other tweaks, like reasoning as to why posts have been deleted or why something is being disallowed from now on (see the Suarez example re: user complaints) would definately help things.

I would actually imagine that most of the time when a mod gets involved be it in a superthread or elsewhere to clamp down on for example off topic talk be it an "in joke" or whatever else it is probably as a result of a user complaint as I wouldnt wade in on a situation I didn't get but if a user is feeling alienated from the conversation etc as Mickeroo outlined then I probably would have a word in some form (obviously depending on the context of the individual situation) - not going against your reasoning for reasoning etc here meerly saying that I think the example you gave would actually be what would be normally the reason for action in such honestly not all that common situations

This feedback thread is 100% useless if absolutely nothing changes as a result.

nothing will change mid thread. The mod team wont just respond to one of your posts and say yes from now on we will do what you said but we will discuss (and are currently discussing) the points brought up here to see what if anything we need to change for the upcoming season with regards the running of the forum.

For example the idea about a shelf life for match threads I think is something we will def be looking at. I don't know if we will look to limit that they can only be started 24/48hrs before hand and or last a similar time afterwards but I think the idea is practical myself as after that discussion can be taken to the team threads.


Would also like to remind people not to single out a moderator for his/her actions in this thread. We are looking for feedback here but it was clearly outlined in the OP we were to avoid specific cases or people we have gripes with nor to scapegoate individual posters or Moderators. Not singling anyone out here but individual mods shouldnt be exxpected to explain their posting style.

I've seen also the suggestion that there should be a seperate thread to be starterd where posters could question the mods - In theory this sounds nice but it would most likely turn into just dispute resolution and there is a place for that already plus it would be a huge time sink for the moderation team who already can't be expected to see and or action every post that needs it.

dfx-

Benimar wrote: »

The issue is with people posting about a topic after the Mod banned talk of it, BUT the Mod had no right to impose the ban as the discussion was on-topic and within the charter. Its a very specific instance and I agree 100% with earlier posters that carding a poster in this case if unjust.

This issue isn't with disobeying a Mod instruction, its about a Mod overstepping their powers and banning posting about a player/topic with no justification.

Can you PM me the link to where it happened? I don't remember it off-hand. Thanks.

[I did not say it was about disobeying a mod instruction - I had two or three posts discussing when a mod might step in with MagicIRL before that post quoted.]

Bounty Hunter

RasTa wrote: »

I thought the popcorn gif being a card was gone from the last feedback thread.

When will the mods answered my question on why ManYoo is allowed?

This mod would think because the vast majority of posters, myself included and perhaps even some of the other mods didn't know it was offensive in anyway and cos it really is not posted that often at all. Similar to ManU in the way that yes sure if you urban dictionary it you may find that it is listed as a offensive term but if we listed every term related to british soccer teams that are down as being offensive via that site then we would have a really exhaustive list in the charter especially if we included very rarely used terms.

RasTa

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

This mod would think because the vast majority of posters, myself included and perhaps even some of the other mods didn't know it was offensive in anyway and cos it really is not posted that often at all. Similar to ManU in the way that yes sure if you urban dictionary it you may find that it is listed as a offensive term but if we listed every term related to british soccer teams that are down as being offensive via that site then we would have a really exhaustive list in the charter especially if we included very rarely used terms.

So it's ok to still use it? Seems hypocritical

Dozen Wicked Words

ManYoo is ridiculous and clearly irritates some fans and if Manchester United fans don't use it why should it be allowed. Unless people can explain why other fans would use it? Why would it be so hard for fans to just use the actual names of the team. Why would that rule be so hard to stick to?

Novel idea, we could call Chelsea, erm, how about Chelsea, Liverpool, I dunno, for the lols, Liverpool etcetcetcetcetc

Bounty Hunter

RasTa wrote: »

So it's ok to still use it? Seems hypocritical

I never said it's ok to use it I answered why it is not currently against the charter. Because its virtually never used and most, myself included probably didn't even know the negative connotation towards it.

Blatter

People shouldn't find ManYoo offensive, but the fact is that a lot of people don't like it and I'm pretty sure most people who use the term know that too.

It just sounds a bit tacky, childish and disrepectful. It's definitely one of those terms that some people use to get a slight dig in whilst being safe in the knowledge that they won't be punished for it.

Pro. F

Mars Bar wrote: »

That's weird! What skin are you on?

It looks that way for me on the forum default skin.

Just to be clear, we normal users do sometimes see a reason on the info page for a card. I can't remember if it shows up under another heading or if it goes in the "Active Warning" section.

RasTa

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

I never said it's ok to use it I answered why it is not currently against the charter. Because its virtually never used and most, myself included probably didn't even know the negative connotation towards it.

blueser wrote: »

Go to Red Cafe; a lot of ManYoo fans are not too disappointed not to be facing us at Wembley. We just have to be careful now not to ''do a Wigan'' on the day.

blueser wrote: »

Agreed. He has to stay. We now need ManYoo to win a couple of games otherwise, horror of horrors, they might sack him.

gosplan wrote: »

Fergie's ManYoo always crossed a lot but usually from near positions on the edge of the box. Moyes does seem obsessed with getting to the byline and whipping huge balls in. Not really good enough given the players he has.

recylingbin wrote: »

Daughter videos her dad watching manyoo Fulham game.

I could go on, I've reported some of them so I don't believe it's new to the mod team.

Agueroooo

RasTa wrote: »

I could go on, I've reported some of them so I don't believe it's new to the mod team.

Does ManYoo really upset you that much

Knex*

Just ban them all and move on. This thread will turn into a farce if we discuss every spin off from a Club's name.

Trivial, really. I don't care if anyone uses them, so I sure as hell won't care if nobody can.

Think the majority will feel the same. Can't believe the amount of posts we've had on bloody ManYoo, lolerpool, and Chelski.

Christ on a bike.

RasTa

Knex. wrote: »

Think the majority will feel the same. Can't believe the amount of posts we've had on bloody ManYoo, lolerpool, and Chelski.

Christ on a bike.

Exactly, all I wanted to know was why aren't all silly names banned?

Will I Amnt

Agueroooo wrote: »

Does ManYoo really upset you that much

That's not the point.

Agueroooo

Will I Amnt wrote: »

That's not the point.

I know and I have stated what I think why they are banned.

K-9

Knex. wrote: »

Trivial, really. I don't care if anyone uses them, so I sure as hell won't care if nobody can.

This.

darced

This post has been deleted.

Nuri Sahin

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Just on this point, I think accountability on discussion forums (and in life in general) regarding predictions is extremely important. In my view, once you post things on a public forum you should be forced to own them. If people want to take strong predictive stances in discussion it's good as it leads to robust debate, but it's only fair that such arguments get pulled up along the line if it doesn't pan out the way they thought it would.

If this wasn't allowed, it would benefit trolling and WUMing rather than mitigate against it. If people were allowed to fire their heavy artillery with every counter intuitive negative prediction on rival clubs / disliked players and managers and never have those posts pulled up for reference a season or seasons down the line that would be a very exploitative loophole for those of a particular mindset.

Assessment of predictions and the ability to highlight a lack of consistency in positions is a fairly basic aspect of debate in all walks of life. The suggestion to remove it here should be avoided at all costs imo.

Sorry Lloyd, after my original post I didn't read the whole middle section of the thread till now, that plus I had a long post written last night that I accidentally deleted without posting.

I have no issue with accountability. Sure, not too long ago, I highlighted my horrible prediction before the start of the season of the Chicago Bulls winning the NBA Championship and a player of said team, Derrick Rose winning MVP, even sticking $100 on the latter happening at 10/1 in the NBA thread. There's examples in the soccer forum too, but I'm not arsed trawling through my posts like some people are quite clearly compelled too to find examples. I know it's there. The NBA example was the most recent one off the top of my head so I mentioned that here. In saying that, I don't like someone cherry picking bits of my arguments however. It's tabloidism at it's finest and that does nothing for any discussion, IMO.

For example. If I have 20 posts on a player who I don't think Liverpool should sign, and I put in the time and effort to post why I don't want him signed in 15 out of 20 of those posts, heck it can be even half of them or even less for all I care, but just go with me for a moment. Yet someone who's schtick is to lurk and when the opportunity arises, tries to make posters foolish by selective quoting the 5 posts with the least amount of detail or could simply be considered the worst of the posts if you will. Well, I think I or anyone else have a right to be a bit unhappy at that. I'd consider that to be trolling or being a WUM, whatever people here wish to call it.

Funny enough, when I did similar as I was tired of some cretin continually trying to bait and wind me up even when I took a break from this joint and couldn't defend myself, well, when I did was considered trolling.

In short, there's a difference in what you did a month or two ago in the Liverpool thread, and what I mentioned above.

Lucas Hood wrote: »

I'd be of the opinion that all betting posts should be kept to the gambling forum, same as fantasy football.

Agree, but aftertiming should be a card offence at either rate, most certainly if there is no pic provided. Though in saying that, the amusing thing for me is that it's more common to see posters who are regularly on Boards throughout the day, most days of the week doing it. It could be a poster with 40K posts or 400 posts, but they're regulars It's a case of them being too cowardly to post up bets before an event. Kinda like the guy in the pub or bookmaker who shouts the loudest after winning an accumulator, but doesn't mention the fifty accumulators beforehand that had lost. In reality, they're up a tenner if even that.

Turtyturd wrote: »

The modding is too inconsistent across the forum. Chelsea/City can have match discussions it their superthreads, one poster has gotten a yellow for the gif rule despite it occurring in every match thread, not to single a mod out but Mars Bar put an in thread warning about player abuse a while back, which people will say is great that she used her initiative but it's not very fair on the poster who gets a yellow for the same thing. I know the fault for inconsistent modding has been shifted back to the posters not reporting posts, but mods have to take the blame. For me they will play both sides of the fence, saying that it's too difficult to ban/infract posters unless they have a conclusive body of proof, yet there are plenty of examples of them doing so based on their own interpretation.

Well said.

Nuri Sahin

Seeing who has said 'Manyoo' over the past 2-3 years makes for interesting reading.

edit - 5 years even.

Knex*

Nuri Sahin wrote: »

Seeing who has said 'Manyoo' over the past 2-3 years makes for interesting reading.

edit - 5 years even.

There's thread titles with that in it from way back and all. Back when the SF was a more simple place, and Mike didn't live in fear of being greeted with a gif on every page.

The_Kew_Tour

I dont really see the problem in somebody saying Man Yoo or Man U or whatever. Manure though and you are game ball.

Darkglasses

Ok, we're getting towards the end of this thread's specified lifespan. Now's a great time to make a solid, well thought out argument for a specific rule change.

Speaking personally, one thing I don't want to be forgotten is the suggestion to have match-threads to have a definite life-span. Let's say 24 hours before and after kick-off. I think it's very workable and could help to keep the discussion on-track and away from personal bickering. We don't have to be completely rigid about it, but enforce it as appropriate.

Kerrigooney

Darkglasses wrote: »

Ok, we're getting towards the end of this thread's specified lifespan. Now's a great time to make a solid, well thought out argument for a specific rule change.

Speaking personally, one thing I don't want to be forgotten is the suggestion to have match-threads to have a definite life-span. Let's say 24 hours before and after kick-off. I think it's very workable and could help to keep the discussion on-track and away from personal bickering. We don't have to be completely rigid about it, but enforce it as appropriate.

Well if this thread is anything to go by maybe a "No more feedback threads because they're absolutely pointless" rule.

Al Capwned

Surely you should wait until the thread is closed and decisions made before judging whether or not the thread is a waste of time or not?

Darkglasses

Kerrigooney wrote: »

Well if this thread is anything to go by maybe a "No more feedback threads because they're absolutely pointless" rule.

Well let's make something of it then, it's got two whole days left. What is one feasible and specific change we could make to the charter that would improve things on this forum for the next 12 months.

Kerrigooney

Al Capwned wrote: »

Surely you should wait until the thread is closed and decisions made before judging whether or not the thread is a waste of time or not?

Maybe I should but I just get the feeling nothing important is going to change.

Todays Heysel thread being a good example. Endless trolling from morning to night and nothing done about it. I'm not blaming the mods either because the people doing it(we all know who they are...same as usual)are staying on just the right side of the rules. But we still know they're doing it. I'm not sure what sort of a rule change can change that.

GavRedKing

Kerrigooney wrote: »

Maybe I should but I just get the feeling nothing important is going to change.

Todays Heysel thread being a good example. Endless trolling from morning to night and nothing done about it. I'm not blaming the mods either because the people doing it(we all know who they are...same as usual)are staying on just the right side of the rules. But we still know they're doing it. I'm not sure what sort of a rule change can change that.

The opposite end of the scale is to be totally 100% hard assed about decisions and card and ban on a whim.

Theres a fine line between over and under modding, in terms of whats actioned.

If we're too heavy handed people will complain, if we're too soft people will say theres too any trolls and users getting away with murder.

Its a fine balancing act trying to please everyone without trying to kill and stifle the forum.

Darkglasses

GavRedKing wrote: »

The opposite end of the scale is to be totally 100% hard assed about decisions and card and ban on a whim.

Theres a fine line between over and under modding, in terms of whats actioned.

If we're too heavy handed people will complain, if we're too soft people will say theres too any trolls and users getting away with murder.

Its a fine balancing act trying to please everyone without trying to kill and stifle the forum.

We've gotten a lot of contributions in this thread looking for both word-for-word charter absolute consistency and on the other hand looking at context, using best judgement and common sense, and basing everything on "don't be a dick". I see the value in both, but I don't think we've reached an overwhelming consensus in this thread. However, we can take on-board the suggestions in day-to-day modding without changing the charter.

Kerrigooney

GavRedKing wrote: »

The opposite end of the scale is to be totally 100% hard assed about decisions and card and ban on a whim.

Theres a fine line between over and under modding, in terms of whats actioned.

If we're too heavy handed people will complain, if we're too soft people will say theres too any trolls and users getting away with murder.

Its a fine balancing act trying to please everyone without trying to kill and stifle the forum.

I know it is and I appreciate the effort that ye make. I really do. I wouldn't fancy having to do it.

I'm having a "do I even want to be on Boards anymore" evening after reading the Heysel thread. Don't mind me.

shamrock55

I dont know about mods being too hard or soft in handing out cards and bans, but i got a 2wk ban on the last day of the season for calling a player on the team i support a knob cos he scored an og, now to me thats a bit extreme in fairness its gonna come to the point where we will be afraid to open our mouths at all for fear of getting ****ed out

Al Capwned

Kerrigooney wrote: »

Maybe I should but I just get the feeling nothing important is going to change.

Todays Heysel thread being a good example. Endless trolling from morning to night and nothing done about it. I'm not blaming the mods either because the people doing it(we all know who they are...same as usual)are staying on just the right side of the rules. But we still know they're doing it. I'm not sure what sort of a rule change can change that.

Well i certainly agree with you about the Heysel thread, as I said on there, some of it is shocking.

Darkglasses

shamrock55 wrote: »

I dont know about mods being too hard or soft in handing out cards and bans, but i got a 2wk ban on the last day of the season for calling a player on the team i support a knob cos he scored an og, now to me thats a bit extreme in fairness its gonna come to the point where we will be afraid to open our mouths at all for fear of getting ****ed out

This isn't the place to discuss your own specific warnings, you first pm the mod who awarded it and then if that breaks down, you go to the dispute resolution forum. But I really want your feedback, so let's talk about it generally. We really can't take the time to find out who supports who every single time, we just see the abusive post. There's been a lot of arguments in this thread that we should enforce the charter word-for-word like that.

Speaking specifically, what is a really feasible, workable way things can be done differently in the next 12 months?

niallo27

One thing I have noticed in the last year or two is how tribal this forum has got. Any negativity towards your team is attacked very quickly and the word bitter and troll is thrown around so easy. I have seen this in the liverpool thread as well and I suppose it is easy just to jump on the bandwagon and gang up on a poster.

niallo27

Darkglasses wrote: »

This isn't the place to discuss your own specific warnings, you first pm the mod who awarded it and then if that breaks down, you go to the dispute resolution forum. But I really want your feedback, so let's talk about it generally. We really can't take the time to find out who supports who every single time, we just see the abusive post. There's been a lot of arguments in this thread that we should enforce the charter word-for-word like that.

Speaking specifically, what is a really feasible, workable way things can be done differently in the next 12 months?

Well on your personal experience are a lot of yellow cards reversed after a few PM's. After a few yellows I got during the years I found the process completely useless often having to wait a week or two for a reply.

Al Capwned

I think a lot of common sense on 'outside' posters behalfs would help here - I've posted maybe 10 times in rival teams superthreads iirc, always in a constructive (i think) manner, and have been largely well received.

But to exaggerate to make the point, if I tip into the Arsenal thread and post a pic of van Persie in a United top, well then I deserve a reaction.

Will I Amnt

Darkglasses wrote: »

This isn't the place to discuss your own specific warnings, you first pm the mod who awarded it and then if that breaks down, you go to the dispute resolution forum. But I really want your feedback.

Most people's experience of the standard of moderation is as a result of action taken against them or action not taken against someone else, it's only natural that you will hear accounts of personal experience.
I haven't seen anybody trying to use this thread to dispute anything, there shouldn't really be a problem referencing a particular incident.

kryogen

Darkglasses wrote: »

Well let's make something of it then, it's got two whole days left. What is one feasible and specific change we could make to the charter that would improve things on this forum for the next 12 months.

I like the idea of match threads having time set time limits, 24 hours before a game would be good, a bit of a pain for the bigger games, maybe some exceptions could be made, and certainly a thread closing time limit of 24 hours after the final whistle.

Imo everything relevant will have been said in that time, people will say maybe that people who were at the game and travelling may not have had time to post in the match thread in that case, but it doesn't stop them posting about their experiences in the club thread itself.

Maybe make it a 48 hour maximum time limit?

Whatever the limits are, setting time limits on them would be a good thing.

After a couple of days there is not exactly a whole lot you can add to a match thread really

Darkglasses

niallo27 wrote: »

Well on your personal experience are a lot of yellow cards reversed after a few PM's. After a few yellows I got during the years I found the process completely useless often having to wait a week or two for a reply.

Myself personally, I've only been a mod on this board since 17th of April, and in that time I think only 2 or 3 of the people I warned appealed it by pm, and maybe only 1 went to dispute resolution forum. None were reversed because there were specific breaches of the charter, which I could refer them to. The mods who have been around much longer I'm sure have a very different statistic to offer you.

The process by which you dispute warnings/infractions/bans is something that is set down site-wide by administrators, which we can't change in this thread. What do you think is something specific we can change in this thread?

kryogen

I would also be of the mind that a mid season feedback thread would be a good idea too, a mid term report type of thing, to see how things are going, how the new (if any) rules are affecting the forum, if something turns out to be a disaster it can be taken out for example.