Feedback Thread 2016 - Mod Warning in OP

eagle eye

Panthro wrote: »

How so?

One is saying that a club is a laughing stock, another is saying that a club is sh1t. They are nothing like Chelski which is just a turn of phrase saying they have a Russian owner.

Two are like something you would hear from a young teenager or younger, the other one has a bit of intelligence and wit about it.

LiamoSail

Panthro wrote: »

And equally, grown men who post such nonsense should as you say "cop the funk on"

I agree that referring to the likes of Chelski or Manure is ridiculous, but it doesn't mean it should be banned.

Panthro

eagle eye wrote: »

One is saying that a club is a laughing stock, another is saying that a club is sh1t. They are nothing like Chelski which is just a turn of phrase saying they have a Russian owner.

Two are like something you would hear from a young teenager or younger, the other one has a bit of intelligence and wit about it.

Oh so one is slightly less ridiculous compared to the other two therefore it should be allowed?
That's where the line is it at so is it?
(Can't believe I'm even having this conversation but there ya go)

CSF

LiamoSail wrote: »

I agree that referring to the likes of Chelski or Manure is ridiculous, but it doesn't mean it should be banned.

I think it's a good thing that the mods would try and weed out as much of the ridiculousness as possible.

Largely, the only people who have to worry about mods being rigid in their approach are the people who troll away and then quote such buzzwords as 'banter' and accuse others of being sensitive and childish for not wanting to read their ridiculousness/trolling.

BMMachine

RasTa wrote: »

It's a humour thread, nobody speaks and random point scoring images gets put up.

Ignore it if it offends you, problem solved.

aside from all the trolling done by trolls on that thread.

oh am I allowed to call them trolls on this thread? or not? Cos thats a rule on other threads and it seems like different threads have different rules

Probably best a mod just clarifies the humour thread and puts this subject to bed!

LiamoSail

CSF wrote: »

I think it's a good thing that the mods would try and weed out as much of the ridiculousness as possible.

Largely, the only people who have to worry about mods being rigid in their approach are the people who troll away and then quote such buzzwords as 'banter' and accuse others of being sensitive and childish for not wanting to read their ridiculousness/trolling.

Some go full on Internet police on it though. I got a card for referring to fans with a nazi flag as nazis. I wasn't trolling or trying to wind anyone up, just making a point. It's ridiculous at times

BMMachine

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=99885241&postcount=5424

oh look at this pointless bait posted by a man united fan from the trolling website "You're not famous anymore". How utterly hilarious and so very relevant. It is not at all part of the petty point scoring that riddles the forum, no way. It took me so long to find too

NukaCola

The Humour thread has very little humour in it..........everyone knows what it is.........some good funny posts get lost in the noise, best stay out if it annoys you.....

Flint Fredstone

Does anybody else have a problem with the humour thread?

GLaDOS

The humour thread is grand, I follow it pretty regularly. Its usually funny, occasionally cringeworthy. Can get a bit stupid when a load of posts on the same topic go up. If you aren't a fan of it, it's very easy to avoid. Wouldn't consider it worthy of much attention in terms of reviewing the forum.

BMMachine

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

Does anybody else have a problem with the humour thread?

is that the issue or is it more that you like the trolling that goes on in it? hate to cut through the b.s. but thats pretty much it. Some people like the trolling in it as, well, they like trolling. The mods should be doing as much as possible to get rid of that culture and from where I stand thats easily done. Let the trolling happen on another site (there are many)

Flint Fredstone

BMMachine wrote: »

is that the issue or is it more that you like the trolling that goes on in it? hate to cut through the b.s. but thats pretty much it. Some people like the trolling in it as, well, they like trolling. The mods should be doing as much as possible to get rid of that culture and from where I stand thats easily done. Let the trolling happen on another site (there are many)

I like stuff that I think funny. I've thanked plenty of posts slagging off United in that thread.

Kerrigooney

I thought everybody knew where they stood with the "Humour" Thread?

Sometimes you give,sometimes you take.

If you don't like it don't open it.

Buford T. Justice XIX

Unearthly wrote: »

Maybe the site could implement a thread ignore feature, like ignore poster.

Problem solved

If they could sort out an ignore feature that would stop ignored posters posts being showed when they are quoted, it would make the site a lot more enjoyable.

Then when you ignore a poster, he stays ignored instead of showing up repeatedly for the rest of the day as people log in and quote exactly what you are trying to ignore.

CSF

LiamoSail wrote: »

Some go full on Internet police on it though. I got a card for referring to fans with a nazi flag as nazis. I wasn't trolling or trying to wind anyone up, just making a point. It's ridiculous at times

I'm not gonna go through individual cases because you could be here all night, but they're doing a pretty good job all in all and I would like to see more of the stupid cr*p dealt with.

Buford T. Justice V

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

If they could sort out an ignore feature that would stop ignored posters posts being showed when they are quoted, it would make the site a lot more enjoyable.

Then when you ignore a poster, he stays ignored instead of showing up repeatedly for the rest of the day as people log in and quote exactly what you are trying to ignore.

Firefox used to do one and still do afaik.


Think it was an add on called Ignore vbulletin

dfx-

RoboKlopp wrote: »

Probably best a mod just clarifies the humour thread and puts this subject to bed!

For me, the ongoing issues for the Humour thread are around chat (which is by far and away the most reported issue for the thread) and not descending into tit-for-tat stuff.

I think it's going ok as it is.

eagle eye

Panthro wrote: »

Oh so one is slightly less ridiculous compared to the other two therefore it should be allowed?
That's where the line is it at so is it?
(Can't believe I'm even having this conversation but there ya go)

Two of them are offensive, one isn't is the way I see it.

How on earth is Chelski offensive?

Panthro

eagle eye wrote: »

Two of them are offensive, one isn't is the way I see it.

How on earth is Chelski offensive?

Its childish. As is manure and lolerpool.
Grown men using them are as bad as grown men offended by them.

Turtyturd

It's not offensive, it's childish and unnecessary. The problem is when you card that and Maureen every time yet ignore the other ones such as Spuds, Brenton, and the current favourite the Emptyhad it creates inconsistency.

eagle eye

Panthro wrote: »

Its childish. As is manure and lolerpool.
Grown men using them are as bad as grown men offended by them.

Well I'd agree that two of them are childish but not the Chelsea one. It's harmless imo.

Agent Coulson

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

If they could sort out an ignore feature that would stop ignored posters posts being showed when they are quoted, it would make the site a lot more enjoyable.

Then when you ignore a poster, he stays ignored instead of showing up repeatedly for the rest of the day as people log in and quote exactly what you are trying to ignore.

This x100.

Panthro

eagle eye wrote: »

Well I'd agree that two of them are childish but not the Chelsea one. It's harmless imo.

Jaysus, there is no line between any of them, they're all childish.
And pointless.
Just like this conversation!

Buford T. Justice XIX

Turtyturd wrote: »

It's not offensive, it's childish and unnecessary. The problem is when you card that and Maureen every time yet ignore the other ones such as Spuds, Brenton, and the current favourite the Emptyhad it creates inconsistency.

Well, Spurs are over in their own forum so they're not likely to get offended and report the post.

It's petty and childish and fairly easily pinpoints the posters you can't take seriously, imo.

It's inconsistent when some are carded and others not, though.

Where would you draw the line between childish and simple trolling though, seeing as Emptyhad is fairly new to the scene?

Beasty

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

Emptyhad is fairly new to the scene?

First time I've seen reference to Emptyhad is in this thread. Certainly cannot recall any posts reported because of it. If they were I would imagine it would get the same treatment as Chelski

However this seems to be brought up in every Feedback thread and invariably the status quo has remained. If you do try to make a distinction where do you draw the line? Arguably Sam is fat, maybe Fergie has certain nasal features. It seems to me that these nicknames are used precisely because posters want to have a laugh at another club (and their fans) which may therefore wind up fans of that club. Why else use them?

Flint Fredstone

Turtyturd wrote: »

It's not offensive, it's childish and unnecessary.

Like calling Marcus Rashford by the name Welbeck 4.0?

BMMachine

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

Like calling Marcus Rashford by the name Welbeck 4.0?

and here we have a classic example of the tit for tat and point scoring which infects the forum. both Turd and Fred are trying to troll each other and of course the usual suspects backing them up by thanking them etc.

come down on these people like a ton of bricks. problem solved.

Flint Fredstone

BMMachine wrote: »

and here we have a classic example of the tit for tat and point scoring which infects the forum. both Turd and Fred are trying to troll each other and of course the usual suspects backing them up by thanking them etc.

come down on these people like a ton of bricks. problem solved.

I think you should look up the definition of trolling.

CSF

To be honest, the exact way this thread is going is the stuff you need to stamp out.

Paully D

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

3) A potential reexamination about enforcement of the old rule of 'no match discussion in superthreads'. What has made this forum great in the past is the interaction of different fan bases in one place (that isn't a free for all cesspit). I think there has been some element of Utd / Liverpool fans retreating into bunkers in superthreads and unwilling to discuss matches in the neutral match threads. The more people don't interact with each other the less they'll be able to do so in an adult fashion.

I think your post is very good Lloyd but I'd have to disagree on this point to a certain extent.

For example, there's probably about 3 posters on here who would have any interest in say a typical Sunderland v [insert team outside the big guns here] game at 3pm on a Saturday. A match thread would be doing well to reach 10 posts and IMO it would be a waste when it can be discussed in the superthread.

In fairness it would probably work extremely well for Manchester United and Liverpool games due to the volume of discussion their games generate on here, but then there's a situation where it's one rule for a certain section of fans and another for others.

5starpool

A lot of cleanup has happened in the soccer forum over the years in terms of posters being banned, but there are a good few left I could still add to the list that wouldn't be any loss for the vast majority, and I certainly don't just mean that as one sided as some might think.

Andre 3000

I dunno if this is possible any more or if it has been mentioned before in previous feedback threads so forgive me if so, but removing the "thanks" function in this forum might sort a lot of issues? Obviously some posts that are incredibly informative deserve some sort of reinforcement and acknowledgement. And it's worth mentioning that the thanks function enables users in the future to conserve time so they don't have to read every single post extensively (works a charm in AH for example), but in relation to the whole point scoring and banter thing, if the majority are fed up with it maybe removing the thanks would weed out this...as it is literally and figuratively just point scoring. Just a thought...

BMMachine

5starpool wrote: »

A lot of cleanup has happened in the soccer forum over the years in terms of posters being banned, but there are a good few left I could still add to the list that wouldn't be any loss for the vast majority, and I certainly don't just mean that as one sided as some might think.

the thing to me is, its incredibly obvious why some people are on here and yet nothing is done

adox

Andre 3000 wrote: »

I dunno if this is possible any more or if it has been mentioned before in previous feedback threads so forgive me if so, but removing the "thanks" function in this forum might sort a lot of issues? Obviously some posts that are incredibly informative deserve some sort of reinforcement and acknowledgement. And it's worth mentioning that the thanks function enables users in the future to conserve time so they don't have to read every single post extensively (works a charm in AH for example), but in relation to the whole point scoring and banter thing, if the majority are fed up with it maybe removing the thanks would weed out this...as it is literally and figuratively just point scoring. Just a thought...

I really like the thanks function. It's an easy way to acknowledge you agree with someone's point of view without having to elaborate.

I get your point regarding "thanks whores" but that wouldn't be reason enough for me to want it gone and the good far outweighs the bad IMO.

adox

BMMachine wrote: »

the thing to me is, its incredibly obvious why some people are on here and yet nothing is done

Why don't you elaborate a bit more then? Your posting on this thread could be construed as trollish, repeating the same point over and over again despite numerous replies.

Andre 3000

Andre 3000 wrote: »

I dunno if this is possible any more or if it has been mentioned before in previous feedback threads so forgive me if so, but removing the "thanks" function in this forum might sort a lot of issues? Obviously some posts that are incredibly informative deserve some sort of reinforcement and acknowledgement. And it's worth mentioning that the thanks function enables users in the future to conserve time so they don't have to read every single post extensively (works a charm in AH for example), but in relation to the whole point scoring and banter thing, if the majority are fed up with it maybe removing the thanks would weed out this...as it is literally and figuratively just point scoring. Just a thought...

Not having a dig here so take it as you will but my two cents.
To your point:
At the same time, why remove the thank function? Why would anyone give two ****es about what post you can and can't thank? Is it really that bad that something like thanking a post bothers somebody? Seriously how overboard can you be without literally turning the place into a forum prison.
Since you mention AH, 90% of the threads are an OP getting the piss ripped of of him and everyone else thanking the posts that do so in jest.
Just saying

adox

The re-reg thing is a real annoyance to me. It seems a cheap gimmick to hide behind a new online persona or a handy way of avoiding a ban. I could be chatting to people in the soccer forum that I have interacted with for years and have no idea it's them.
I've been quite surprised when I have seen links to old super threads to raise a point and you find out that some posters are re-regs when they are quoted with their old username in the old thread. Just seems a bit sneaky and a way of getting around the rules also.
I can only think of one poster in the Utd super thread who closed his account and is active again as a re-reg but actually publicly let you know on the thread. At least you know who you are dealing with.

5starpool

adox wrote: »

The re-reg thing is a real annoyance to me. It seems a cheap gimmick to hide behind a new online persona or a handy way of avoiding a ban. I could be chatting to people in the soccer forum that I have interacted with for years and have no idea it's them.
I've been quite surprised when I have seen links to old super threads to raise a point and you find out that some posters are re-regs when they are quoted with their old username in the old thread. Just seems a bit sneaky and a way of getting around the rules also.
I can only think of one poster in the Utd super thread who closed his account and is active again as a re-reg but actually publicly let you know on the thread. At least you know who you are dealing with.

On this bit, if the old username is in a quote, then this is a name change on the same account, not a re-reg, which is quite a different thing.

In general though I agree that re-regging being allowed is generally a bad thing sitewide. There are some genuine reasons for it, but that's a minority of cases. Nothing the soccer forum in particular can do about it though.

Flint Fredstone

adox wrote: »

The re-reg thing is a real annoyance to me. It seems a cheap gimmick to hide behind a new online persona or a handy way of avoiding a ban. I could be chatting to people in the soccer forum that I have interacted with for years and have no idea it's them.
I've been quite surprised when I have seen links to old super threads to raise a point and you find out that some posters are re-regs when they are quoted with their old username in the old thread. Just seems a bit sneaky and a way of getting around the rules also.
I can only think of one poster in the Utd super thread who closed his account and is active again as a re-reg but actually publicly let you know on the thread. At least you know who you are dealing with.

I re-registered. I let a mod know I'd be registering again after closing my previous account in case they wanted to include my record, not that it was bad or anything, just in the interest of fairness.
If someone wants to regain a bit of anonymity for a while then that's their choice.

Mickeroo

Mod: Just a reminder that calling posters trolls or pointing out their behaviour is trollish is against the charter folks,so I'd appreciate if folks could cut that out or they're just going to pick up silly cards.

/Mod

adox wrote: »

The re-reg thing is a real annoyance to me. It seems a cheap gimmick to hide behind a new online persona or a handy way of avoiding a ban. I could be chatting to people in the soccer forum that I have interacted with for years and have no idea it's them.
I've been quite surprised when I have seen links to old super threads to raise a point and you find out that some posters are re-regs when they are quoted with their old username in the old thread. Just seems a bit sneaky and a way of getting around the rules also.
I can only think of one poster in the Utd super thread who closed his account and is active again as a re-reg but actually publicly let you know on the thread. At least you know who you are dealing with.

If they're quoted with their old name then they didn't re-reg they just had the username changed, all their bans and cards are still on their profile.

Regards people who close their account and start a new one, provided I know it's them they're treated as the same user. If someone got a card in september, closed their account, got access later in the season on a new account and got two cards I would be treating them as if they had picked up 3 cards on one account provided I knew for a fact they were the same poster.

adox

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

I re-registered. I let a mod know I'd be registering again after closing my previous account in case they wanted to include my record, not that it was bad or anything, just in the interest of fairness.
If someone wants to regain a bit of anonymity for a while then that's their choice.

Personally I think it's a bit weird and would immediately make me suspicious of the authenticity of posts from that poster.
I had no idea you were a re-reg btw despite plenty of interaction on the Utd superthread with you.

adox

Mickeroo wrote: »

Mod: Just a reminder that calling posters trolls or pointing out their behaviour is trollish is against the charter folks,so I'd appreciate if folks could cut that out or they're just going to pick up silly cards.

/Mod



If they're quoted with their old name then they didn't re-reg they just had the username changed, all their bans and cards are still on their profile.

Regards people who close their account and start a new one, provided I know it's them they're treated as the same user. If someone got a card in september, closed their account, got access later in the season on a new account and got two cards I would be treating them as if they had picked up 3 cards on one account provided I knew for a fact they were the same poster.

Fair enough on both points and it does clear things up a bit on the re-reg procedure although personally it raised suspicion with me, although as pointed out to me by 5starpool it's a site thing rather than specific to the soccer forum so I'll leave it at that.

Beasty

The Euros kick off next week, and it may take a day or two to open up access (which is over to the office to do). If anyone has any comments on this (I see there have already been a few approving) could you perhaps post them sooner rather than later as a decision will be required quite quickly

Thanks

Flint Fredstone

adox wrote: »

Personally I think it's a bit weird and would immediately make me suspicious of the authenticity of posts from that poster.
I had no idea you were a re-reg btw despite plenty of interaction on the Utd superthread with you.

Really? I think I hinted it to you on Twitter last year :pac:
I had my reasons for wanting some anonymity, also outlined these to the mod I spoke with before closing my last account. I didn't think it anybody else's business to be honest. Anonymity didn't last that long mind.

BMMachine

adox wrote: »

Why don't you elaborate a bit more then? Your posting on this thread could be construed as trollish, repeating the same point over and over again despite numerous replies.

numerous replies but none from people that have any power.
trollish to people that quite ironically want to protect themselves because they love trolling.
"stop trolling the humour thread?! but I love trolling! I'll just thank any poster that disagrees with him and pretend the trolling doesn't happen"

as I said, its simple and its obvious. For some reason certain trolls are protected because this website is a giant bureaucracy. A small example is the distortion of what is acceptable on one thread but not another on one forum, such as this.
Either tell us and mark down that trolling is allowed on the thread or remove the trolling and those involved. I can pick 3 people from the top of my head who if removed from the thread there would be no issue whatsoever. All 3 are well known trolls, all 3 have had disciplinary problems in this forum and all 3 enjoy doing it. I know thats really blunt, but its accurate and those reading, they know it

Strumms

Well.. This is what I'd like and it's no slight or criticism of the mods or indeed anyone it's an opinion and I hope constructive for the benefit of everyone...

1) The trolling of match threads by supporters of clubs who might be rivals of one of the teams involved, yet their own team is not playing, just pure bias and wind up merchants... we are all up for a bit of banter and craic and all that but it detracts from proper discussion.. ironically is a fair few who have commented here are not shy about engaging in this sort of stuff.. we give out about biased pundits and so forth but if there is not a facilitation of honest dialogue and good banter its just descends into farce hence we have seen so many match threads being locked.. tough on the mods time but i'd be happy to see a few more yellows abound if it meant keeping the quality of the forum on the up..

2) The number of times in your own clubs thread where others.. a minority all the same try to shout others down and belittle their opinion rather then counter it with a considered, reasonable and tempered opinion of their own can be off putting and not in the spirit of the forum and over the line as far as the charter goes... the mantra of report the post is all well and good but I often see mods involved in the thread and obviously see what is being said and the tone of the discussion which can dip into borderline bullying ... just saying more could be done overall to enhance the quality of discussion while keeping it fun, relevant, with a bit of reasonable needle and inter club banter without being sanitized

3) -1 to the Euros free for all access without the normal access request..

with respect ..

brianregan09

I read through 6 pages of the feedback thread and I think there is a massive problem in this forum that I've never noticed until reading this thread....

What do you guys actually think you're discussing here ? Rocket Science ? Government Policies ? The future of our children

Card me if i'm out of line or what , But this is a football forum is it not ? As in football we all watch on the TV its not life and death so why are people getting so PC and Bitchy about it , Banter and slagging and the rest of it is all part and parcel of it and makes some games even banter to have a bit of fun with rival supporters . Before I go further I know some people do take it a step too far and I agree with the majority it is alot of the Liverpool-Man U stuff and I know from dealing with them in real life they are the ones to get offended easily which is just silly

Any one who is on an Internet Soccer Forum and is getting offended by such terms as Manure, Maureen, Chelski and the likes ....no way to sugarcoat it but they really need to turn off the computer and get out more it's a fun resource to chat with other fans , get team news, get info about Ireland games and other such stuff so why are people trying to sabotage it with such child like behavior

Giggsy11

People getting salty over humour thread? If that bothers so much just don't open the thread.

I don't know about others but I find few of the posts very funny and found them funny even when we had Moyes in charge. what's the point if you can't even laugh at little things?

Also same poster brining it every time feedback thread is opened. If some 3 posters annoy you so much then use ignore function and grease monkey addon, that will solve the problem.

On the whole this forum is grand. Mods have done excellent job, not perfect but one of the best moderated forums. Even more impressive considering this is not a dedicated forum for individual clubs.

What ManUtd fans do when Liverpool are not winning and what Liverpool/City fans do when ManUtd are not winning is so obvious but sometimes it's a good laugh.

Flint Fredstone

Giggsy11 wrote: »

People getting salty over humour thread? If that bothers so much just don't open the thread.

I don't know about others but I find few of the posts very funny and found them funny even when we had Moyes in charge. what's the point if you can't even laugh at little things?

Also same poster brining it every time feedback thread is opened. If some 3 posters annoy you so much then use ignore function and grease monkey addon, that will solve the problem.

On the whole this forum is grand. Mods have done excellent job, not perfect but one of the best moderated forums. Even more impressive considering this is not a dedicated forum for individual clubs.

What ManUtd fans do when Liverpool are not winning and what Liverpool/City fans do when ManUtd are not winning is so obvious but sometimes it's a good laugh.

This is what I like about this forum. Where else would you find a young man from India saying something is grand :pac: