Soccer Forum Moderation tonight

gimmick

So a 2nd thread got closed as well saying the discussion of the main talking point of the world cup so far should be confined to the match thread "for now"? That is utterly crazy and smacks to me of mods just blocking their ears and shouting "I'M NOT LISTENING".

When will it be okay to talk about this in a thread of its own?

Bad modding top to bottom again.

Beasty

GavRedKing wrote: »

I can start a thread and issue a once off warning that any trolling will be actioned with a ban and we can see how long it lasts but the long and short of it is Suarez has bit a player for the 3rd time, seemingly, what more do you want to say? Everything else will fall into trolling or winding up one side of the Utd/Liverpool divide.

A thread like this needs ground rules, as proposed by Gav, otherwise it would descend into chaos.

I would add though that starting such a thread last night in the heat of the moment was bound to be even more troublesome, so in my view this is certainly not a case of "bad modding" - if a thread gets started this morning with appropriate ground rules as Gav is suggested I think that's pretty good modding

therecklessone

Beasty wrote: »

A thread like this needs ground rules, as proposed by Gav, otherwise it would descend into chaos.

I would add though that starting such a thread last night in the heat of the moment was bound to be even more troublesome, so in my view this is certainly not a case of "bad modding" - if a thread gets started this morning with appropriate ground rules as Gav is suggested I think that's pretty good modding

I can see why in the heat of the after-match the original thread was closed, but there really doesn't need to be ground rules for a new one: just start a thread and remind people that like with all threads they should bear the Soccer Forum charter in mind when posting.

You can, and should, do it right now.

Match threads are supposed to have a limited lifespan, if you confine this discussion to there and/or the Liverpool Superthread then you are making a rod for your own backs when the new PL season starts and something contentious happens in a big match which leads to charges being brought by the FA/PL.

GavRedKing

Anybody wondering why we dont need a Suarez thread, read the last few pages of the Italy v Uruguay thread.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057236117&page=73

In fact I'm going to give ye all a chance to see how it goes, I'm going to close the match thread and start a Luis Suarez thread, if it lasts until 11AM I'd be very surprsied.

mike65

Its a pity the unwashed are currently on the football forum, they were not things would be a bit more manageable I'd say.

P_1

mike65 wrote: »

Its a pity the unwashed are currently on the football forum, they were not things would be a bit more manageable I'd say.

Sorry but that's an incredibly elitist post to have as your 90 thousandth. People have to start somewhere on this site and attitudes like that tend to go against the general friendliness of the place.

Darkglasses

mike65 wrote: »

Its a pity the unwashed are currently on the football forum, they were not things would be a bit more manageable I'd say.

The overwhelming majority of trouble is still coming from forum regulars, the usual tribalistic stuff.

I also dislike your "unwashed" description.

mike65

Ah jasus, does everything have to come with a ****ing smiley face to indicate tone ?

Just on this

. People have to start somewhere on this site and attitudes like that tend to go against the general friendliness of the place.

the open door is temporary don't forget. The old rules which operate to keep the newbie out will be back.

Lovely Bloke

Darkglasses wrote: »

I also dislike your "unwashed" description.

yeah, "The Great Unwashed" is an eons old term, and is normal parlance for most people.

Jesus, are we supposed to sanitise everything now?

weisses

GavRedKing wrote: »

In fact I'm going to give ye all a chance to see how it goes, I'm going to close the match thread and start a Luis Suarez thread, if it lasts until 11AM I'd be very surprsied.

A selfie with your surprised look will do :P

Darkglasses

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

yeah, "The Great Unwashed" is an eons old term, and is normal parlance for most people.

Jesus, are we supposed to sanitise everything now?

I know it's old. Check any dictionary you want, it refers to inferiors, lower classes, etc.

What you think about it if say moderators and admins used it to describe everyone else on the website? I think that would be sh!tty.

Mickeroo

gimmick wrote: »

So a 2nd thread got closed as well saying the discussion of the main talking point of the world cup so far should be confined to the match thread "for now"? That is utterly crazy and smacks to me of mods just blocking their ears and shouting "I'M NOT LISTENING".

When will it be okay to talk about this in a thread of its own?

Bad modding top to bottom again.

That thread was open for about ten minutes, resulted in 6 reported posts , 2 infractions and a warning. It would have been locked on any forum on the site.

Kess73

Darkglasses wrote: »

I know it's old. Check any dictionary you want, it refers to inferiors, lower classes, etc.

What you think about it if say moderators and admins used it to describe everyone else on the website? I think that would be sh!tty.

Well if a mod said it, there would probably be a feedback thread set up to express genuine outrage.

Kess73

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

yeah, "The Great Unwashed" is an eons old term, and is normal parlance for most people.

Jesus, are we supposed to sanitise everything now?

Loving all your contributions in the Suarez thread. Good to see that you had loads to contribute and justified the outrage you showed last night at yesterday's thread being closed.


So unusual for you to start a feedback thread and then have nothing at all to add to the forum or thread that you were complaining about.

Lovely Bloke

Darkglasses wrote: »

What you think about it if say moderators and admins used it to describe everyone else on the website? I think that would be sh!tty.

Are you forgetting that I used to have access to various mod forums on this site?

It has been used before in those circles, seriously, do a search. I can't any more.

gimmick

Mickeroo wrote: »

That thread was open for about ten minutes, resulted in 6 reported posts , 2 infractions and a warning. It would have been locked on any forum on the site.

But as a mod are you not meant to clean the thread rather than stop people from talking about it and hiding away is some huge mega match thread?

People get animated talking about sports. Friends take the piss out of each other about it all the time. Boards soccer forum does not want any such fun, only serious, stern conversation where only the facts may be discussed.

Mickeroo

gimmick wrote: »

But as a mod are you not meant to clean the thread rather than stop people from talking about it and hiding away is some huge mega match thread?

People get animated talking about sports. Friends take the piss out of each other about it all the time. Boards soccer forum does not want any such fun, only serious, stern conversation where only the facts may be discussed.

The discussion was going fine in the match thread and Liverpool at the time, now the match thread is closed and the discussion is in its own thread along with the Liverpool thread. The thread was superfluous to the forum's needs at the time and was only serving to make work for us on a night that was already proving busy.

Bounty Hunter

I find it extremely odd that 30mins after a thread is closed for something explicitly forbidden in the charter which was linked to when the thread was closed a feedback thread is started about the same issue and who a moderator supports is called into question especially when that moderator nor any other has been contacted during that 30mins by that person in an attempt to seek answers to what they are wondering so much so that they thought a feedback thread was needed.

Unless people are trying to take a dig at the moderation team (not specifically saying it is the case here) sometimes a little patience is needed or a more communicative approach.

Also bringing who someone supports into it is def not needed and just to add to what the other mods have said I "The Villa Mod" (excpet nobody every gives me cr*p when I warn/infract them cos I dont support their rivals, and yet I still warn/infract em) would have closed that thread and one of the main reasons why is that as the recent forum feedback thread pointed out, The Forum want more consistancy so if something is clearly outlined in the charter as being off bounds and resulting in a specified ban and others have fallen afoul of it before then of course any of the mods no matter who they support will lock the thread and implement said ban.

There is now a dedicated thread for all the Suarez action which was opened by a mod and from the get go had necessary warnings about acceptable conduct because since this incident there have been far more posts that are against the charter than there have been in a long time. Hopefully this will make this not an issue for anyone that it was an issue for anyway

Mr E

Kess vs. Baldy posts deleted. Take it to PM guys...

Penny Tration

mike65 wrote: »

Its a pity the unwashed are currently on the football forum, they were not things would be a bit more manageable I'd say.

Wow. Nice to know my posts in the thread aren't welcomed simply because I'm not a regular poster.

gandalf

TBH having been in situations like this when I modded Soccer I don't see the problem with the original lock. The way that thread was phrased was an attempt at trolling and not discussion. Add to that the fact that the soccer forum is not operating under its normal restrictions then I don't see what option the mods had.

Pro. F

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

I find it extremely odd that 30mins after a thread is closed for something explicitly forbidden in the charter which was linked to when the thread was closed a feedback thread is started about the same issue and who a moderator supports is called into question especially when that moderator nor any other has been contacted during that 30mins by that person in an attempt to seek answers to what they are wondering so much so that they thought a feedback thread was needed.

Unless people are trying to take a dig at the moderation team (not specifically saying it is the case here) sometimes a little patience is needed or a more communicative approach.

Also bringing who someone supports into it is def not needed and just to add to what the other mods have said I "The Villa Mod" (excpet nobody every gives me cr*p when I warn/infract them cos I dont support their rivals, and yet I still warn/infract em) would have closed that thread and one of the main reasons why is that as the recent forum feedback thread pointed out, The Forum want more consistancy so if something is clearly outlined in the charter as being off bounds and resulting in a specified ban and others have fallen afoul of it before then of course any of the mods no matter who they support will lock the thread and implement said ban.

There is now a dedicated thread for all the Suarez action which was opened by a mod and from the get go had necessary warnings about acceptable conduct because since this incident there have been far more posts that are against the charter than there have been in a long time. Hopefully this will make this not an issue for anyone that it was an issue for anyway

We were told that the SF charter has been suspended for the duration of the WC (http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057229200).

As the forum is now an open to everyone to use, except currently banned Soccer users, we've decided to suspend the Soccer Forum charter in place of a temporary World Cup charter.

I do not agree that the SF charter should have been suspended, but once you did do that, you can not then enforce the SF charter. You mention a specified ban. If Shadowcomplex received such a ban, that needs to be overturned immediately. If you have any modding that needs to be done, you need to do it according to the temporary (and imho extremely inadequate) WC charter and not by enforcing the specifics of the SF charter.

Just to be clear, I've no problem with the mods being a bit arbitrary in deciding what threads the Suarez bite could be discussed in yesterday evening and what threads were to be closed. I assume there was a heap of modding work being done and mods controlling what threads were allowed at the time seems reasonable to me. But using the SF charter for that is not on.

Mickeroo

Pro. F wrote: »

We were told that the SF charter has been suspended for the duration of the WC (http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057229200).


I do not agree that the SF charter should have been suspended, but once you did do that, you can not then enforce the SF charter. You mention a specified ban. If Shadowcomplex received such a ban, that needs to be overturned immediately. If you have any modding that needs to be done, you need to do it according to the temporary (and imho extremely inadequate) WC charter and not by enforcing the specifics of the SF charter.

Just to be clear, I've no problem with the mods being a bit arbitrary in deciding what threads the Suarez bite could be discussed in yesterday evening and what threads were to be closed. I assume there was a heap of modding work being done and mods controlling what threads were allowed at the time seems reasonable to me. But using the SF charter for that is not on.

At the bottom of the WC charter:

GavRedKing wrote: »

Also, for a guidline, please see the Soccer Forum charter which relates to abuse, trolling etc etc

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056320446

Soccer charter was re-instated last week, have a look at the other feedback thread.

Pro. F

Mickeroo wrote: »

At the bottom of the WC charter:



Soccer charter was re-instated last week, have a look at the other feedback thread.

No, the SF charter was not re-instated last week. You, the mods, may have chosen to re-instate it last week, but you didn't. You put it back in the stickies, you announced the re-instatement in a feedback thread in a different forum and Gav added the "for a guidline" bit to his Temporary WC Charter announcement, but you still left the Temp WC charter up and the first line of that says:

As the forum is now an open to everyone to use, except currently banned Soccer users, we've decided to suspend the Soccer Forum charter in place of a temporary World Cup charter.

(link)

Mickeroo

Pro. F wrote: »

No, the SF charter was not re-instated last week. You, the mods, may have chosen to re-instate it last week, but you didn't. You put it back in the stickies, you announced the re-instatement in a feedback thread in a different forum and Gav added the "for a guidline" bit to his Temporary WC Charter announcement, but you still left the Temp WC charter up and the first line of that says:
(link)

It was re-instated, Gav just forgot to edit that line. I'll do it now, thanks for bringing it to my attention.

Will I Amnt

Pro. F wrote: »

No, the SF charter was not re-instated last week. You, the mods, may have chosen to re-instate it last week, but you didn't. You put it back in the stickies, you announced the re-instatement in a feedback thread in a different forum and Gav added the "for a guidline" bit to his Temporary WC Charter announcement, but you still left the Temp WC charter up and the first line of that says:
(link)

And I raised this issue in the other Feedback thread.

Will I Amnt wrote: »

Cool. Maybe the people of the forum should be made aware of this?
Seeing as the thread about the new charter was locked and most people that have read it may not go back and read it again thinking there is nothing new there.

We were not made aware of it. Anybody that read the temporary charter before would most likely not have been aware the OP was edited.

Mickeroo

Will I Amnt wrote: »

And I raised this issue in the other Feedback thread.





We were not made aware of it. Anybody that read the temporary charter before would most likely not have been aware the OP was edited.

I edited the thread title to say it was updated that day back when I read your post.

Pro. F

Mickeroo wrote: »

It was re-instated, Gav just forgot to edit that line. I'll do it now, thanks for bringing it to my attention.

Editing the post would be a good move all right, but there's more to it than that imo. It's probably a good idea to mention the re-instatement in the WC Charter thread title as well. I see you edited the title previously to state that there was an update, but I think when it's this important the re-instatement needs to be stated explicitly in the title.

Also, since the SF charter was not re-instated last week and yet the mods have been modding according to it for a week during the biggest tournament in the sport, there is a serious problem. Cards and bans have no doubt been issued under the SF charter in that time. Any bans, cards or warnings that were issued under the SF Charter in that time need to be rescinded.

I'm aware that that might be an impossible amount of work to do, so maybe you could just rescind the bans for now and then when it comes to second yellows (which currently result in bans) or yellows (if they are being issued subsequent to warnings from that week), they could be checked as the mods issue them.

Darkglasses

Pro. F wrote: »

Also, since the SF charter was not re-instated last week and yet the mods have been modding according to it for a week during the biggest tournament in the sport, there is a serious problem. Cards and bans have no doubt been issued under the SF charter. Any bans, cards or warnings that were issued under the SF Charter in that time need to be rescinded.

I absolutely disagree. Our charter (and pretty much every charter on this site) is basically just the Boards FAQ/TOU contextualized.

KERSPLAT!

Why was a new charter implemented? I know the card system was changed, fair enough, but why not just add the extra few points to the existing charter instead of suspending, then reinstating, editing, title changes, etc. Seems like an absolute mess at this stage