Feedback Thread 2016 - Mod Warning in OP

LiamoSail

GavRedKing wrote: »

What crimes has he been convicted of?

Russian "justice" isn't the bar I tend to measure criminality by

LiamoSail

CSF wrote: »

So it is intended to offend then?

I don't even use the term myself to be honest, but no I don't think it's intended to offend, but it obviously a dig.

Flint Fredstone

GavRedKing wrote: »

Anyone thats offended by any of them should probably get off the internet, the point is theyre all childish and only used to wind people up.

I cant see anyone for example getting offended by saying Spuds or Sours lost again LOL, but its childish and will probably lead to a Spurs fan replying.

Its either none are acceptable or they all are, and for a smoother run forum, none of them are allowed.

Is Sours a word that will get you carded? It used to be an autocorrect for me when trying to say Spurs before my phone "remembered" it. It's also an easy typo to make with the o and p next door to each other.

K-9

I don't know, it smacks of Chelsea getting a term banned because Liverpool and United have ones, but if it causes that much offence, fair enough.

Is there a similar one for City we have to avoid? If not maybe emptihad should be added as it could be offensive too.

GavRedKing

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

Is Sours a word that will get you carded? It used to be an autocorrect for me when trying to say Spurs before my phone "remembered" it. It's also an easy typo to make with the o and p next door to each other.

I've made that typo myself actually and corrected it just incase, its an easy one to make.

I suppose, like anything in the forum, if its reported and the context of the post is judged to be using Sours or Spuds (as the d is below the r on the keyboard) in away to wind up or bait Spurs fans, we can act accordingly, the charter isnt set in stone per se, its a guideline, just becasue a term isnt covered or outlined int he charter doesnt mean its ok to use.

GavRedKing

K-9 wrote: »

I don't know, it smacks of Chelsea getting a term banned because Liverpool and United have ones, but if it causes that much offence, fair enough.

Is there a similar one for City we have to avoid? If not maybe emptihad should be added as it could be offensive too.

I've seen Man sh*ty before or some variant of it, it can be included in the charter but as I've said before, its impossible to write down everything that isnt acceptable, the charter is a guideline and those childish names will only wind up or bait people into a reaction.

SantryRed

K-9 wrote: »

I don't know, it smacks of Chelsea getting a term banned because Liverpool and United have ones, but if it causes that much offence, fair enough.

Is there a similar one for City we have to avoid? If not maybe emptihad should be added as it could be offensive too.

It really doesn't. It's just a blanket ban on childish names. It's as simple as that and it's daft that it's even being discussed. What does it add to use the term? Nothing!

This is being discussed as if it's the ban on streams. As at least the streams add something. These childish names add nothing, absolutely no reason to use them. Just use the right term and move on. Simple as that.

LuckyLloyd

HalloweenJack wrote: »

These are some names that I've made up on the fly to remind posters of where the club's owners are from, just in case we'd forgotten:
Yankpool
Yankchester United
Manchester Sheikhy
Iranton
Sunderyank
Norwich Britty
Swanleek City

I can think of ones for Leicester and Watford but they're fairly racist.

Would you take people who use these names seriously? Why should Chelski be any different? And why not just use their proper name?

It's just silly and completely unnecessary and reminds you that the poster you're dealing is entertained by nonsense like that and people who complain that they can't post silly and unnecessary things on a discussion board aren't to be taken seriously, imo.

I personally agree that the arguments for the right to use 'chelski' are indeed ridiculous. People can hide behind the 'football has always involved banter' type arguments all they wish but what it really boils down to is desperately wanting to belittle rival clubs at every opportunity. Some people can't help themselves in that respect, and the humour thread is a testament to that.

The blanket ban on all these terms keeps the line clear and unambiguous. What happens on other football forums or around the Internet should be of no concern to us. This soccer forum has always aimed to offer a different experience.

Lovely Bloke

yeah, just use the correct term. why anyone would want to use anything different is beyond me.

Skylinehead

Soccer forum is clearly in a pretty good state right now if we're arguing over the right to call Chelsea Chelski

K-9

SantryRed wrote: »

It really doesn't. It's just a blanket ban on childish names. It's as simple as that and it's daft that it's even being discussed. What does it add to use the term? Nothing!

This is being discussed as if it's the ban on streams. As at least the streams add something. These childish names add nothing, absolutely no reason to use them. Just use the right term and move on. Simple as that.

Can't argue with that, as long as it's consistent fair enough.

eagle eye

SantryRed wrote: »

It really doesn't. It's just a blanket ban on childish names. It's as simple as that and it's daft that it's even being discussed. What does it add to use the term? Nothing!

This is being discussed as if it's the ban on streams. As at least the streams add something. These childish names add nothing, absolutely no reason to use them. Just use the right term and move on. Simple as that.

It's clear you have a problem with people being childish and not necessarily insulting.

Have you any kids? I think maybe you become a whole lot more tolerant when you have kids. There are lots of things that can be childish/immature without being insulting. I would put Chelski firmly in that category, Spuds too.

eagle eye

I'm not a fan of the 'statisticially it's better to prevent than deal with problems' attitude. I think it's nice to have a bit of harmless fun around the place.

If a word is clearly insulting then I'm all for it being banned but please stop banning words that you consider childish/immature only.

Somebody can be banned for being a general nuisance. You don't have to pick them out for just being childish. Wait until they insult/bait/troll and they are gone.

It's about weeding out the bad ones and there will always be plenty of them but I see a couple on here all the time who don't ever seemed to be banned.

Then you have the groups that go around like bullies, they thank each others posts all the time and all quote and run down the same poster. I think they fancy themselves as leaders of the forum or something like that.

Turtyturd

Skylinehead wrote: »

Soccer forum is clearly in a pretty good state right now if we're arguing over the right to call Chelsea Chelski

To be fair there is a ban on talking about certain issues, and several other issues brought up have been ignored. Chelski is a handy time killer.

Thread does seem a lot quieter in general though, probably just part of boards' general decline.

OwaynOTT

Turtyturd wrote: »

To be fair there is a ban on talking about certain issues, and several other issues brought up have been ignored. Chelski is a handy time killer.

Thread does seem a lot quieter in general though, probably just part of boards' general decline.

Also it's as sunny as **** outside. I dunno about you but as soon as it hits 5, I fling the PC and phone in the bin and go hoop rolling.

LuckyLloyd

Turtyturd wrote: »

To be fair there is a ban on talking about certain issues, and several other issues brought up have been ignored.

?

K-9

It's a bit strange that a feedback thread is mostly complementary on mods all right!

GavRedKing

K-9 wrote: »

It's a bit strange that a feedback thread is mostly complementary on mods all right!

I always wanted to see what a voting system would throw up if we were looking for a new mod, bit like an election campaign, be good craic until the mud started being flung.

BMMachine

crass sexist posting in the forum? yay or nay?
to me its absolutely pointless and entirely lowbrow. We are already bombarded by images of beautiful women wherever we go, on the internet and elsewhere, so why here as well?

Bobby Baccala

BMMachine wrote: »

crass sexist posting in the forum? yay or nay?
to me its absolutely pointless and entirely lowbrow. We are already bombarded by images of beautiful women wherever we go, on the internet and elsewhere, so why here as well?

You're some piss taker, if that sort of thing upsets you then fùck your laptop in the bin and stay off the Internet.

inforfun

BMMachine wrote: »

crass sexist posting in the forum? yay or nay?
to me its absolutely pointless and entirely lowbrow. We are already bombarded by images of beautiful women wherever we go, on the internet and elsewhere, so why here as well?

Because i had to deal with an FA that appointed the worst manager in Dutch football's history, the only thing i look forward to this summer is the usual "the women of EURO2016"

Please dont take that away from me.

BMMachine

inforfun wrote: »

Because i had to deal with an FA that appointed the worst manager in Dutch football's history, the only thing i look forward to this summer is the usual "the women of EURO2016"

Please dont take that away from me.

here on boards? surely theres a million other websites that do the same... the pics come from somewhere.


wasn't a "thing" this year in the man utd thread that they would post loads of pictures of women for some reason? Not a great look. Also if you are opening up the forum to the outside then are you sure you want that there?

Cantona's Collars

BMMachine wrote: »

crass sexist posting in the forum? yay or nay?
to me its absolutely pointless and entirely lowbrow. We are already bombarded by images of beautiful women wherever we go, on the internet and elsewhere, so why here as well?

Here's a bombshell-Boards is part of the internet.Between your hatred of the Humour thread and good looking women,people will think you are a priest from the 1950's.

You complain about childishness yet you are coming across as one petty,sulky kid with these rants.

inforfun

Meh, once every 2 years there is thread for a couple of weeks with some pretty women in, usually, football shirts.

It is not porn.

Liam McPoyle

BMMachine wrote: »

here on boards? surely theres a million other websites that do the same... the pics come from somewhere.


wasn't a "thing" this year in the man utd thread that they would post loads of pictures of women for some reason? Not a great look. Also if you are opening up the forum to the outside then are you sure you want that there?

The issue with the pics in the united thread were because they were mostly gifs of Kate Upton in all her bikini straining, booby jiggling glory and were NSFW.

Pictures of a pretty woman fully clothed are not the same thing.

Not even close.

Flint Fredstone

inforfun wrote: »

Because i had to deal with an FA that appointed the worst manager in Dutch football's history, the only thing i look forward to this summer is the usual "the women of EURO2016"

Please dont take that away from me.

We'll take you in as one of our own. Grab a green jersey and be disappointed all over again.

inforfun

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

We'll take you in as one of our own. Grab a green jersey and be disappointed all over again.

Well, saw them last night and against Holland, i fear that tournament is over after 3 matches and 0 points.
'74/'78/2010 (and a little bit 2014 once they got going) .... i had my fair share of disappointments already. Not looking for more.

Giggsy11

BMMachine wrote: »

here on boards? surely theres a million other websites that do the same... the pics come from somewhere.


wasn't a "thing" this year in the man utd thread that they would post loads of pictures of women for some reason? Not a great look. Also if you are opening up the forum to the outside then are you sure you want that there?

If you are out then don't open the thread specifically opened to post babes. Just like I don't open any porn sites at work,

niallo27

The Backwards Man wrote: »

This is more feedback for some posters rather than the moderators, and it's probably futile but anyways, maybe someone will listen.

The dragging of Liverpool/Man Utd into every thread that has nothing even remotely to do about them both makes very difficult reading for those of us that aren't a fan of either, and I'm sure it does for many fans of those clubs too.

The constant complaining about threads being derailed by this is annoying too. You might 1 or 2 comments about liverpool/utd and then its the whole why are you dragging this thread down bull**** that annoys me. Most of the time its a few stupid posts which are easily ignored.

BMMachine

Saul T Nutzz wrote: »

Not even close.

incorrect. its actually very close. its the same oogling and lowbrow culture just dressed up a bit differently

marklazarcovic

anyone offended enough by some random-er online saying chelski,lolerpool,maureen etc ,and actually reports the post to begin with,needs to follow some other sport, you wouldn't complain down the pub watching with other fans ..

your just out to get people carded as some sort of 'victory' for yourself.

pathetic.

use ignore function on childish posters,take and give a slag if your capable, have a laugh.. even this thread is getting too serious.


getting slagged makes giving one back all the sweeter when its your turn.

tl;dr .GROW UP

BMMachine

zerks wrote: »

Here's a bombshell-Boards is part of the internet.Between your hatred of the Humour thread and good looking women,people will think you are a priest from the 1950's.

You complain about childishness yet you are coming across as one petty,sulky kid with these rants.

it isnt a hatred of the humour thread, its a hatred of the lowbrow trolling that goes on in there by a small number of users. can you guess who? I don't know what kind of mood the mods are in today so Im not sure if I can state the obvious or not.
The humour thread would be fine if it wasn't for that same trolling culture you see in the match threads leaking over into that. "ooohh I might get banned if I post this here, I'll just post it over there instead because I want to troll but I also want to get away with it." The 'need a win' mentality and little victories, amazing coincidence isn't it. If you tidy up the humour thread and tidy up that small, sh*tty trolling culture on it, I'm sure it will lead stop it on other threads and halt that whole mentality. As is, trolls are protected - they even get posts deleted for them - and thats a pretty sh*tty way of running a forum, where mods arbitrarily card people for standing up for themselves/team while a troll gets off sniggering to themselves.

as for the sexist lowbrow posting of pictures of women, is there really a need? nope. Thought this site and this forum prided itself on high standards.

CSF

marklazarcovic wrote: »

anyone offended enough by some random-er online saying chelski,lolerpool,maureen etc ,and actually reports the post to begin with,needs to follow some other sport, you wouldn't complain down the pub watching with other fans ..

your just out to get people carded as some sort of 'victory' for yourself.

pathetic.

use ignore function on childish posters,take and give a slag if your capable, have a laugh.. even this thread is getting too serious.


getting slagged makes giving one back all the sweeter when its your turn.

tl;dr .GROW UP

Do you really think people are personally offended by things? Or just don't want to sift through tonnes of childish sh*te when trying to have an actual discussion?

It's not school where telling on someone is some sort of mortal sin. The collaboration of all in helping to make the forum a better read. There are obvious trolls on the go at times so it doesn't make sense to say 'just ignore them', that definitely doesn't improve the forum as a whole.

brianregan09

BMM you're actually the one that's coming off as Trolling now .Most of you're posts are becoming samey , if ya don't like how the place is run go somewhere else

You've a problem with the euro 2016 hot fan thread or the humour thread....well don't go in there its pretty simple

While we're at it let's sap any last bit of fun out of the forum

****ing ridiculous

BMMachine

M!Ck^ wrote: »

While we're at it let's sap any last bit of fun out of the forum

****ing ridiculous

nope. just applying that don't be a d*ck rule.


no need to have threads dedicated to posting photo's of attractive women for people to ogle at and there's no need to play an endless game of trolling on the humour and match threads - both would be the action's of a d*ck, yeah?

monkey9

BMMachine wrote: »

nope. just applying that don't be a d*ck rule.


no need to have threads dedicated to posting photo's of attractive women for people to ogle at and there's no need to play an endless game of trolling on the humour and match threads - both would be the action's of a d*ck, yeah?

There's also no need for you to go into threads that constantly wind you up.

BMMachine

monkey9 wrote: »

There's also no need for you to go into threads that constantly wind you up.

what if you want to go into a thread and have a laugh but its just full of endless trolling done by the same individuals?
noticeably Mick has dodged the question and just thanked your post in that passive aggressive point-scoring thing he does. Oh can I mention that? Lets roll the moderator dice game and find out.
Are you saying that trolling is allowed then? How about I start trolling it in the same way? Pretty sure I would be carded, banned etc. I also notice you don't address the point of the same people trolling the match threads are the same people trolling that thread - so its allowed on one but not the other. I also notice no mod on here has said anything in regards to this, probably a complicated matter

Flint Fredstone

Somebody take this thread out back and shoot it.

Liam McPoyle

BMMachine wrote: »

what if you want to go into a thread and have a laugh but its just full of endless trolling done by the same individuals?
noticeably Mick has dodged the question and just thanked your post in that passive aggressive point-scoring thing he does. Oh can I mention that? Lets roll the moderator dice game and find out.
Are you saying that trolling is allowed then? How about I start trolling it in the same way? Pretty sure I would be carded, banned etc. I also notice you don't address the point of the same people trolling the match threads are the same people trolling that thread - so its allowed on one but not the other. I also notice no mod on here has said anything in regards to this, probably a complicated matter

If one person has an issue with something, an issue that nearly nobody else has, then most of the time its the person with the issue that's the real problem.

If one person has an issue with two things, issues that even less people have, then 99.99% of the time its the person with the issue that's the real problem.

Yes, some of the stuff that gets posted in the humour thread would be considered trolling if posted in other threads. I don't believe that anyone could seriously debate that but across Boards, whats acceptable in one forum would be unacceptable in another. Nothing in the humour thread that Ive ever seen could be construed as offensive, unless you get offended by "hur de hur hur, your team lost". The humour thread is essentially a forum within a forum.

The reason its permitted, as many people have already pointed out to you, is that it keeps it out of the superthreads and match threads.

BMMachine

Saul T Nutzz wrote: »

If one person has an issue with something, an issue that nearly nobody else has, then most of the time its the person with the issue that's the real problem.

If one person has an issue with two things, issues that even less people have, then 99.99% of the time its the person with the issue that's the real problem.

Yes, some of the stuff that gets posted in the humour thread would be considered trolling if posted in other threads. I don't believe that anyone could seriously debate that but across Boards, whats acceptable in one forum would be unacceptable in another. Nothing in the humour thread that Ive ever seen could be construed as offensive, unless you get offended by "hur de hur hur, your team lost". The humour thread is essentially a forum within a forum.

The reason its permitted, as many people have already pointed out to you, is that it keeps it out of the superthreads and match threads.

thats fine, so Im allowed to troll on it? and those that troll on it are... what? trolls? just as long as we are all in agreement.
What Im saying is either change it in accordance to the rules here, or label it as such - as I said in my first post. The cake made for Homer in the Simpsons to purposefully ruin

niallo27

Hang on is there something wrong with looking at pictures of hot women, its not like the forum is full of them. Its something fans of all teams can come together in appreciation of.

Oat23

CSF wrote: »

Do you really think people are personally offended by things? Or just don't want to sift through tonnes of childish sh*te when trying to have an actual discussion?

It's not school where telling on someone is some sort of mortal sin. The collaboration of all in helping to make the forum a better read. There are obvious trolls on the go at times so it doesn't make sense to say 'just ignore them', that definitely doesn't improve the forum as a whole.

If you only knew how childish and immature many of the more vocal posters in this thread actually are you'd be shocked. Some went as far as baiting a forum member on twitter & facebook using aliases, then reporting him to mods & admins on here to get him banned for his behavior off site. The abuse he and his family were receiving was unbelievable, and I've seen it continue occasionally on twitter since then.

...and it all started because they supported different football teams you'd assume. This place is exactly like school.

As for what you said about not ignoring obvious trolls - andersonisgod has been ignored since 2013. He was just banned for a month for being a hypocrite (the troll accused another person of trolling), but he should be banned from the SF for good. A total WUM who derails almost all threads he posts in because people keep biting.

I'll probably get a ban for calling him a troll, but it's not like I post here much anyway.

niallo27

I dont mind a bit of a wind up, it makes winning all the sweeter. Your man Rayne passing comments on Couthino against Utd until he scored and then the same against Dortmund. It was classic. I dont want to pick out Rayne as a troll or anything, he seems like a nice guy but it was funny.

niallo27

Oat23 wrote: »

If you only knew how childish and immature many of the more vocal posters in this thread actually are you'd be shocked. Some went as far as baiting a forum member on twitter & facebook using aliases, then reporting him to mods & admins on here to get him banned for his behavior off site. The abuse he and his family were receiving was unbelievable, and I've seen it continue occasionally on twitter since then.

...and it all started because they supported different football teams you'd assume. This place is exactly like school.

As for what you said about not ignoring obvious trolls - andersonisgod has been ignored since 2013. He was just banned for a month for being a hypocrite (the troll accused another person of trolling), but he should be banned from the SF for good. A total WUM who derails almost all threads he posts in because people keep biting.

I'll probably get a ban for calling him a troll, but it's not like I post here much anyway.

Hang on, did this actually happen. I remember something about comments on twitter about boards but were people abusing family members.

monkey9

monkey9 wrote: »

There's also no need for you to go into threads that constantly wind you up.

This.

How hard is it to not click into a thread, jaysus.

If you follow it, just click unfollow and it doesn't appear in your 'My Threads' anymore.

The Humour thread and now the Hot fans thread. Two threads that are a bit of fun. Don't like them that's cool too, just don't enter and moan.

Pretty common sense!

Shanotheslayer

niallo27 wrote: »

Hang on, did this actually happen. I remember something about comments on twitter about boards but were people abusing family members.

Yes it did as far as I'm aware.

Soups123

First of well done on the past season to the mod team and most posters, it's been a **** season for all bar Leicester with meltdowns everywhere, personally I think the forum has become more mature.

If I could change one thing I think it's the regular trollers who skim around the rules. Personally I just move on from the post,I don't bother with ignore but it does get my goat when I see newer or maybe less familiar posters getting sucked in biting and getting the card with the real troll sitting safe.

The forum would be all the better minus these 3/4 posters

BMMachine

RoboKlopp wrote: »

This.

How hard is it to not click into a thread, jaysus.

If you follow it, just click unfollow and it doesn't appear in your 'My Threads' anymore.

The Humour thread and now the Hot fans thread. Two threads that are a bit of fun. Don't like them that's cool too, just don't enter and moan.

Pretty common sense!

here I'll start a thread about how a large portion of Irish Man Utd fans are glory hunters or maybe one about Liverpool fans being over-romantic zealots and hey, if people don't like that they just shouldn't go into that thread. Thats the rules we are playing by is it?

niallo27

niallo27 wrote: »

Hang on, did this actually happen. I remember something about comments on twitter about boards but were people abusing family members.

Anyone that moans about boards members elsewhere, be in Twitter, Facebook etc are incredibly sad tbh. Seriously, wtf.

There's a few on here at it so I believe/been told

Imo, permaban wouldn't be good enough for such people