Feedback Thread 2018

GavRedKing

I propose the following

Timeline:
Please note, as per usual, this thread will be locked a week from now and will be reviewed by the Mods, Cmods and Admins.

Rules:
Trolling, abuse or breaches of the charter in this thread will be an immediate infraction and 2 week ban for anyone who breaches the rules. If you want to post in this thread you are agreeing to accept this rule, we want this thread to run smoothly as its all in your vested interests.

Couple of basic ground rules before we get going:

(1) This isnt a platform to attack individuals or Moderators. This isn't to turn into a witch hunt against people you don't like. This is your chance to tell us what we should or should not be doing.

(2) If someone makes a point that you don't agree with then either respond in a constructive manner with a decent counter-point or don't respond at all. Attempted witty one liners to undermine an argument are pointless and will not be tolerated. Most of the time you think you're being funny, you're not. If you think it's not a good idea outline reasons why you think it's not going to work instead of dragging the thread wildly off topic.

(3) Please, when you're making a point take a second to THINK about it and make sure it's what you actually want. So make sure when you're asking for something to happen that you realise it's going to effect you too, not just other users.

(4) As usual, we'll be using 'Thanks' to work out what suggestions seem the most supported, so if you agree what someone says thank their post and it gives us a better idea and makes it easier to keep track that trying to add up loads of individual posts. This is your chance to have your say so if you have an issue and you think it needs to be resolved mention it, but please remember this isn't a place to grind your axe, try be constructive in your input.

(5) Let's have a grown up discussion.

Thanks.

GavRedKing

Please be advised this will be opened shortly.

Beasty

As I’m sure most of you already know, we took a decision to de-mod MrMac84 a few days ago. Please note that decision was taken at Admin level and the local mods only became aware of that decision as we were in the de-modding process.

The decision was taken as we had noticed MrMac84 had not been modding in a fashion we wanted. Everyone should be aware that mods are expected to be impartial when carrying out their modding duties. Unfortunately things came to a head over the weekend in the wake of the Champions League final and we felt we had to act ahead of the annual feedback thread, for fear of some of the actions of the mod becoming the main focus of the thread.

The decision is not for discussion here. We will in due course look for another mod, and ideally that will be someone familiar with the Manchester United threads. In the meantime I may spend a bit more time keeping an eye on things there. Just to be absolutely clear though, no mod of this forum should consider themselves as a “representative” of a particular club, and equally users should not think any mod is here to “represent” their club. Yes we are posting here because we have an interest in football and in most cases support particular clubs and/or international teams. Mods are not expected to stop supporting their “team(s)” but they can be chosen because they are typically active in threads involving particular teams and can keep an eye on things.

I suspect this thread will at some stage turn to perceived bias in moderation, but that is never the intention. Clearly though we have had issues which triggered that recent Admin action.

I would like to re-iterate that this decision is not for discussion here. You may wish to highlight actions that you feel warrant further discussion, but please do so in the context of the way they were handled rather than any individual who was actively involved.

Any questions about the above, please PM me or one of the other Admins, and do not respond here.

Thanks

LuckyLloyd

I've no interest in discussing the demodding decision other than to say it was nice to see swift decisive action taken in a transparent fashion. Fair play on that.

bucketybuck

The following is from the charter:

2. Major Offence (see list) will result in a red card infraction. A red card infraction will count as two yellow cards for the purpose of point 3 below.

Major Offences (including but not limited to):
Blatant or deliberate breach of charter.
Misuse of tagging system
Abuse of users.
Flaming
Trolling
Breaking a boards.ie rule

The following posts were all posted in the Liverpool superthread.

Oh right 😊 then he is a Cnut so😂

You and that sad post thanking fcuk Mick are two of the worst cûnts in this forum.

You are a wind up merchant and a disgrace of a mod.

**** off you sad ****.

I have reported this scumbag and excuse of a human being.

Actually it's quite appropriate. Scum of the eatrthand worthless.

Twat. Great manager, great progress, great shape. Get out of here ye nonce

Seriously I ask once again, how or why you a moderator?

You wouldn't moderate twin babies on a tit...

You'd look for the suck yourself....

K n o

b

jo

ck

y

y o


u


a

r

e

See exactly what I said. No balls. A eunuch.

Did you **** yourself off rewatching the Madrid goals?

You are prob the biggest dickhead on this forum, a complete and utter spacker. If there was a dickheads World Cup I'd be confident you could bring the trophy back to Ireland. And you are fúcking thick to boot, if brains were dynamite you wouldn't have enough to blow your hat off.

You should be on a register

Idiot.

It's not a meltdown, I'm not a sad cúnt like you whose whole life revolves around a football club.

But hey, if it makes you feel good thinking you've induced a meltdown then by all means enjoy your semi.

Brains of a retarded budgie. Pretty apt your avatar is of Phil Jones tbh

All of those posts were deemed by the mods in question to be yellow card offences.

Since people also get yellow cards for misspelling managers names and other such minor offences, can you please clarify what exactly is a yellow card offence these days? And why the personal abuses noted above were not red cards as per the charter?

Lord TSC

Beasty, there's not much to talk about then if you and the admins have decided to shut down discussions of the biggest issue the forum has at the moment. There's a reason you had to issue that disclaimer: it's cause you know it's the biggest gripe that people are going to have....

I had this pre typed up. It's not just about Mac himself though but the general state of the board right now. That Macs removal was the climax of it all shouldn't shut this all down. A lot of the issues use the other night as an example to expand on general issues.

I have to admit, I've grown more and more frustrated with the modding over the last few months.

I've written and re-written this post a couple of times in the last few days. Trying to figure out the best way to vent without just raving. Tring to write it so it can't just be dismissed by Liverpool fans as the words of a "biased, butt hurt United fan". Trying to write it with the knowledge that as a former mod, I've genuinely tried not to lash out publically about the job mods continued to do after I walked away from the role in frustration. Especially since the manner in which this was handled has meant it will dominate this thread.

Worse, I fear it's largely going to be ignored by the mods and admins too; I've never felt as if the feedback generated from the forum has been any more ignored as it is now. It strikes me this is only being done so ye can say it was, while ignoring the criticisms, and handwaving it away as United fans bemoaning things. I hope I'm wrong on that account.

The calamity the other night was horrific to watch as a former mod. Even if you want to say Mac was on the wind up (and I don't think he was), the resulting response should have seen a dozen posters removed long term from the site. I always thought the typical mod stance was to quickly interject with a mod warning to ignore anyone people think are on the wind up, report them to mods and leave it at that. Given how vitrolic that thread got, it should have had a mod (other than Mac) leap in, and shut down that line of discussion quickly.

Instead, Mac was branded a scumbag, retard, pedo, sex offender, etc. And not only was it let go and go, it felt like when the mods eventually did get around to dealing with the situation, it was done as half-heartidly as possible. Posters who called other posters sex offenders and retards should not have gotten a yellow and dismissed. Those are straight red and banable offenses, no matter what provocation they think they recieved. Examples were raised where someone using the term "snowflake" was punished to the same level as telling someone to register as a sex offender. Thats absurd.


The fact is, I left the moderation team because I felt that the support from other mods was massively lacking. Part of that was the constant harrassment from Pool fans (one or two who would use EVERY reported post to take a shot at me). Part of that was the lax attitude of some mods. Other than dfx, who worked hard at the position and who I respect massively, it felt as if several mods weren't really interested in actually being mods. Selectively enforcing the charter, and disappearing for days on end. This seemed even more evident in the fact there was little to no reaction taken against the Pool thread descending into chaos on Saturday night.

That an admin (Zaph) would then wade in and, in the immediate aftermatch, remove Mac in such a cowardly, unprofessional manner horrified me. Zaph's handling of that situation was appaling. I don't know how you plan on replacing Mac now either; I don't see how anyone would go near the mod ship with a barge poll. This cowardice has been evident a few times in the last 18 months too; the handling of removing the Spurs forum, the handling of removing the unique thread titles, etc.

Time and again, the mods would tell me that their desire was to create a "Melting pot". Time and again, when I'd purpose expanding the forum so United and Pool fans could see a growth to their threads, I was shot down and told that fans need to be able to interact with each other, forced to engage with each other and opposite view points.

So how does that gel with carding Mac, removing his modship and allowing the vile abuse slung his way? Do you genuinely believe that your melting pot is being achieved when that's the reaction such discussions generate.

I write this post as someone who has experienced both sides of this, modding and being a normal poster. The modding standards this year has been awful, and the manner in which Saturday night was dealt with was a critical failure at every junction.

Dublin Spur

Any chance of re-opening the old Spurs Supporters forum ?

I feel unclean having to share with all the riff-raff

Mitch Connor

bucketybuck wrote: »

The following is from the charter:





The following posts were all posted in the Liverpool superthread.


All of those posts were deemed by the mods in question to be yellow card offences.

Since people also get yellow cards for misspelling managers names and other such minor offences, can you please clarify what exactly is a yellow card offence these days? And why the personal abuses noted above were not red cards as per the charter?

I echoe this question - why were these not all red card bannings?

How can this not been seen as bias towards the Liverpool users who have been given basically free reign to throw abuse at site users?

Is there a seperate charter linked in the Liverpool thread that applies to them?

LuckyLloyd

Mitch Connor wrote: »

I echoe this question - why were these not all red card bannings?

How can this not been seen as bias towards the Liverpool users who have been given basically free reign to throw abuse at site users?

Is there a seperate charter linked in the Liverpool thread that applies to them?

Those posts were a reaction to deliberate baiting from a couple of users in the wake of the final whistle on Saturday. I think we would all prefer if people were capable of restraint in such circumstances, but essentially people went looking for a reaction in a time of high emotion and got one.

pjohnson

The charter needs adressing. A rule is either 100% enforced or removed from the chartet. As it is certain parts of the charter are consistently enforced. Others are rarely enforced so whats the point?

Mitch Connor

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Those posts were a reaction to deliberate baiting from a couple of users in the wake of the final whistle on Saturday. I think we would all prefer if people were capable of restraint in such circumstances, but essentially people went looking for a reaction in a time of high emotion and got one.

So if I decide that a liverpool fan having a laugh in the United thread after we balls up agasint Fulham next season is annoying me to the point of wanting to call him a Cnuting Peado, I will only receive a yellow card and be told to calm down?

Can that be added as a disclaimer to the charter moving forward?

*Personal Abuse is not tolerated, unless you are particularly emotional at the time and want to really throw some abuse around.*

Agent Coulson

bucketybuck wrote: »

The following is from the charter:





The following posts were all posted in the Liverpool superthread.

All of those posts were deemed by the mods in question to be yellow card offences.

Since people also get yellow cards for misspelling managers names and other such minor offences, can you please clarify what exactly is a yellow card offence these days? And why the personal abuses noted above were not red cards as per the charter?

When a Mod on the Soccer forum who is a fan of Man U goes into the Liverpool thread directly after Liverpool lose a Champions League final and trolls that fan base.


What kind of reaction would you expect considering that Mod had done the same kind of thing previously in the season and then carded everyone who reacted to their trolling.


If SlickRic had gone into the Man U thread after the FA Cup final defeat and trolled the Man U fan base in there I would expect the same reaction and the same outcome.

pjohnson

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Those posts were a reaction to deliberate baiting from a couple of users in the wake of the final whistle on Saturday. I think we would all prefer if people were capable of restraint in such circumstances, but essentially people went looking for a reaction in a time of high emotion and got one.

IF the charter is right (it doesn't appear to be) the action is report it.

If you flame back then you should face the consequences of your own actions.

For instance:

Lets say "Jim" steals a toy from "Sean".
1) Jim is a pr*ck. Jim will be punished.
2) Sean punches Jim in the face. BOTH are punished.


I mightnt agree with all points of charter but its quite clear in stating certain actions have certain consequences.....until they dont.

Trigger

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Those posts were a reaction to deliberate baiting from a couple of users in the wake of the final whistle on Saturday. I think we would all prefer if people were capable of restraint in such circumstances, but essentially people went looking for a reaction in a time of high emotion and got one.

In fairness it was only really Mac’s post that caused that, fans on that thread then started personal abuse on another user who had not even posted in the thread at that point. Then when he came in to defend himself he was called a sex offender..

At the end of the day, the charter states that personal abuse is a red card offence, it does not say that in certain circumstances it’s a yellow.. it’s there in black and white and while we are posting on this forum we need to adhere by the charter, sure you need to confirm you read it just to sign up.

LuckyLloyd

I'd take a very different view to Lord TSC. In any case where a moderator engages in baiting things will spiral out of control very quickly. In that context it's very difficult for a moderator team to come in and blanket apply the charter to the letter of the law when the incident has its gestation in a violation of the rules by someone who is supposed to uphold those rules. In that sense I don't think there were any other options available really, than how it was handled.

Trigger

Agent Coulson wrote: »

When a Mod on the Soccer forum who is a fan of Man U goes into the Liverpool thread directly after Liverpool lose a Champions League final and trolls that fan base.


What kind of reaction would you expect considering that Mod had done the same kind of thing previously in the season and then carded everyone who reacted to their trolling.

Honestly, and this is honestly, I would expect him to be called a fûckin Wum and a troll , not some of the names that he had been called.

LuckyLloyd

Agent Coulson wrote: »

If SlickRic had gone into the Man U thread after the FA Cup final defeat and trolled the Man U fan base in there I would expect the same reaction and the same outcome.

Well, SlickRic would never do that. I think understanding that helps to understand why this incident was handled how it was.

pjohnson

Agent Coulson wrote: »

When a Mod on the Soccer forum who is a fan of Man U goes into the Liverpool thread directly after Liverpool lose a Champions League final and trolls that fan base.


What kind of reaction would you expect considering that Mod had done the same kind of thing previously in the season and then carded everyone who reacted to their trolling.

Actually good point. This reminds me "Questioning Moderator Decisions" should be removed as its upsetting for some.

IIRC one "upsetting" incident in the Liverpool thread involved a poster (can't remember who) proudly announcing he was "taking one for the team"....he then proceded to troll the United thread after United lost (thus getting his card as planned) this then led to a hape of Liverpool thread posters deciding to criticise/compare/argue about said yellow/past yellows (all of which breaches charter and led to more yellows and more complaints about yellows)......this seemed to lead to a former moderator being called biased when he was following the rules of the charter like he is supposed to....

Agent Coulson

astradave wrote: »

Honestly, and this is honestly, I would expect him to be called a fûckin Wum and a troll maybe with. , not some of the names that he had been called.

The final was the straw that broke the camel's back as such for most in that thread.


That Mod/poster had being doing it all season and getting away it because he could use the black writing to threaten/intimate posters with as had been shown before by the amount of yellow cards that mod had given Liverpool fans over the season.

Lord TSC

Lord TSC wrote: »

So how does that gel with carding Mac, removing his modship and allowing the vile abuse slung his way?

I've already said in the Manchester United thread that the abuse was unacceptable but posting the following I thought wasn't the cleverest, especially in the light of balaclava clad characters paying visits to Wayne Rooney and Rio Ferdinands house. Pretty sure it breaks the charter for baiting and trolling. I think any user would/should be carded for it, but for a mod to do it is particularly poor judgement IMO.

Every club has idiots but there’s some nasty characters in Liverpool

MD1990

bucketybuck wrote: »

The following is from the charter:





The following posts were all posted in the Liverpool superthread.



























All of those posts were deemed by the mods in question to be yellow card offences.

Since people also get yellow cards for misspelling managers names and other such minor offences, can you please clarify what exactly is a yellow card offence these days? And why the personal abuses noted above were not red cards as per the charter?

Mick deserved it.

Trigger

pjohnson wrote: »

Actually good point. This reminds me "Questioning Moderator Decisions" should be removed as its upsetting for some.

IIRC one "upsetting" incident in the Liverpool thread involved a poster (can't remember who) proudly announcing he was "taking one for the team"....he then proceded to troll the United thread after United lost (thus getting his card as planned) this then led to a hape of Liverpool thread posters deciding to criticise/compare/argue about said yellow/past yellows (all of which breaches charter and led to more yellows and more complaints about yellows)......this seemed to lead to a former moderator being called biased when he was following the rules of the charter like he is supposed to....

The same poster then proceeded to personal abuse on Saturday

bucketybuck

Agent Coulson wrote: »

What kind of reaction would you expect

The only reaction I want is to know why clear red card offences were dealt with by issuing yellow cards, and I'd like to hear that answer from the mods and admins, I have little interest in Liverpool fans and United fans having a pissing match about it.

It was a simple question that should have a simple answer.

Trigger

MD1990 wrote: »

Mick deserved it.

Being called a paedo and sex offender?

You cannot make excuses for that level of personal abuse. He hadn’t even posted in the thread, didn’t come in and goad or bait and yet he was personally abused.

Rekop dog

For me the biggest issue on this board is people jumping to say you support "x" rival of team/player you may be criticizing as the root cause of your argument. It so common and utterly tiresome. Its entirely possible to have a strong opinion without it coming from a place of trolling or wumming.

LuckyLloyd

Beasty wrote: »

Just to be absolutely clear though, no mod of this forum should consider themselves as a “representative” of a particular club, and equally users should not think any mod is here to “represent” their club. Yes we are posting here because we have an interest in football and in most cases support particular clubs and/or international teams. Mods are not expected to stop supporting their “team(s)” but they can be chosen because they are typically active in threads involving particular teams and can keep an eye on things.

It's all there in black and white tbf. I don't understand the attachment to having ones "own" moderator, and I certainly don't think that should go back the other way. I don't feel Liverpool fan moderators represent me or the Liverpool thread, nor do I give two ****s about how many we have at any one time. The minute you start thinking in those terms you're thinking about it the wrong way.

I don't often agree with Admin type decisions or edicts, but I think you have to say they got this one spot on lads.

Will I Am Not

MD1990 wrote: »

Mick deserved it.

Explain why?

LiamoSail

Is there any statistics available on forum usage?

My guess is that it's slowing as other platforms more in tune with real life continue to grow.

I can go on twitter or Reddit, or even some fan forums and have reasonable discussions in a grown up manner. Liverpool fans will call Mourinho a dick and Utd fans will use similar for Klopp, just like real life. So what? We carry on without receiving aggressive warnings or PM's, the language of which is more suited to a letter from a teacher to a school kids parents

That seems to be the role certain mods have given themselves now.

Look at the first mod post in a Reddit daily discussion and compare it to the first mod post in the new Liverpool thread.

One is friendly, informative and inviting discussion. The other is a mod grabbing their opportunity to again play the role of school teacher in warning anyone posting on their forum.

Not a big issue in itself, but demonstrates how certain mods like to play the school teacher role.

Unfortunately that's not a role the basic user is too happy with in 2018. Maybe it worked in 2008, but there's alternatives now.

The Backwards Man

I propose a separate forum for people that like football and aren't interested in all the ****e.

Will I Am Not

There’s no excuse for the names thrown about the Liverpool thread the other day. Absolutely none. Anyone trying to justify it is as bad as those engaging in it.

LuckyLloyd

MD1990 wrote: »

Mick deserved it.

I couldn't agree with that in terms of what was specifically posted, nor do I think the posters making posts Sat night / Sun morning would stand over them at this stage.

What I can say, on a more general level, is there are a number of posters who view this forum through a prism of constant conflict. There is some ongoing war happening in their heads, and they are constantly totting up points and perceived hypocrisies. It's terribly dull tbh, and the losers are those who want an active vibrant joint football forum.

Rekop dog wrote: »

For me the biggest issue on this board is people jumping to say you support "x" rival of team/player you may be criticizing as the root cause of your argument. It so common and utterly tiresome. Its entirely possible to have a strong opinion without it coming from a place of trolling or wumming.

Well the Everton thread recently was a particularly bad example of this, where the Everton fans labelled every dissenting opinion on Allardyce as "trolling".

It's a difficult one though, isn't it? What is a genuinely held opinion and what is deliberately antagonizing nonsense masquerading as an opinion?

In the Everton thread, yourself and Eagle Eye were offering genuinely held opinions imo, and I can square that with the fact that ye are two posters who post all across the forum on a range of teams and leagues.

On Sat night, those suggesting Real were in 'second gear' and that is was a stroll and that Klopp is the biggest loser. Was it honest? In the context of the situation and the timing you'd have to conclude it wasn't.

osarusan

I think mods need to decide whether insults such as those copied above are to be dealt with based on whether they were instigated by somebody else's trolling, or whether that simply doesn't matter, and they are just dealt with as if they had been unprovoked.

Personally, I think the latter is a better approach, as with the former, you will get all kinds of attempts to mitigate an insult based on the other poster's posting history. you will also get posters citing the card (or lack thereof) for another poster who said basically the same thing a week earlier.

Apart from that, in the contentious threads, and especially at times that are likely to see tensions rise, something like a 24-hour thread ban might be useful. If a mod comes to the conclusion that a poster is needling away to get a reaction, then a 24-hour thread ban might help.

Trigger

Agent Coulson wrote: »

The final was the straw that broke the camel's back as such for most in that thread.


That Mod/poster had being doing it all season and getting away it because he could use the black writing to threaten/intimate posters with as had been shown before by the amount of yellow cards that mod had given Liverpool fans over the season.

That’s fair enough in your opinion, I don’t follow the Pool thread meticulously.

But the majority of the posters who received yellows on Saturday are here long enough to know that personal abuse is a no go, a straight red card and bannable offence, and that’s not just on the SF but on boards as a whole. Absolutely no leeway should be given when dealing with cases of personal abuse as it opens more doors. I think the question should be answered as why these cases where given only Yellows when site wide it’s a bannable offence. It really doesn’t make sense. I don’t think the straw that broke the camels back or losing a final is a good enough reason for that.

Tom.D.BJJ

Will I Am Not wrote: »

Explain why?

No one deserves that.

DM_7

Enforce the charter on abuse;
The charter exists and should be enforced. Allowing any one poster to abuse another encourages a response and of course encourages others to abuse posters.

Take fast action on Thread:
If people can't post without abuse they should be banned. If large numbers of people are posting in that way and if a thread is moving too fast then close the thread, issue a warning and allow it cool off.

Be prepared:
It had to be obvious that Saturday's match needed an action plan on how to deal with what would be a busy night, possibly disruptive. Were and Mods ready as a group with a plan?

Stop people posting for a rise:
On the other side, the people who go into a thread to rise, slag or troll should be warned they should stop posting in that thread and to grow up. Such behaviour derails threads too often. If this is a place mixing is viewed as vital then it should be in a respectful way. As a United fan I read the United Sperthread and can't be bothered with the tread any time United don't ein as the same posters arrive with the same posts to derail real discussion.

Pre warnings or fans of a specific club only threads for major events:
If a major match like Saturday happens with a well followed club, give them a thread intended for their fans only with a heavily modded warning. Allow neutrals their own thread. People can pick and choose where they want to POST but in the knowledge that 'Manager is clueless' type post from a known fan of another team in the fan only thread will not be welcome. Be honest and admit most fans have zero interest in seeing posts from fans of other teams out for 'a laugh' when their side is playing. If the neutral thread does not have traffic then maybe the forced mixing is the problem.

MD1990

MD1990 wrote: »

Mick deserved it.

He called a manager of a rival team a serial loser, as they had just their 6th final in a row. He deserves all that crap that was typed about him and then to be thrown under the bus by the admins?

Do me a favour.

Skylinehead

astradave wrote: »

That’s fair enough in your opinion, I don’t follow the Pool thread meticulously.

But the majority of the posters who received yellows on Saturday are here long enough to know that personal abuse is a no go, a straight red card and bannable offence, and that’s not just on the SF but on boards as a whole. Absolutely no leeway should be given when dealing with cases of personal abuse as it opens more doors. I think the question should be answered as why these cases where given only Yellows when site wide it’s a bannable offence. It really doesn’t make sense. I don’t think the straw that broke the camels back or losing a final is a good enough reason for that.

You're right in that in that we need to look at how abuse is handled in the charter vs what is actually done, but you're wrong with the site policy stuff. No such rule exists, we hand yellows in AH all the time for personal abuse.

MD1990 wrote: »

Mick deserved it.

Mod: This is borderline personal abuse itself, I suggest you be very careful here.

LuckyLloyd

The After Hours threads on the 8th Amendment were moderated to an exceptionally high standard imo. Any user causing disruption was thread banned for a period and that was that. I think thread bans from the Liverpool / Utd superthreads would be very helpful in that regard. Next thread starts up, thousands of posts and potentially a couple of months later they can join back in the discussion. If they're getting thread banned from multiple iterations of the superthread each season then it will be obvious that they are the problem child.

brevity

The forum is kinda weird tbh.

Everyone knows there is a degree of schadenfreude when it comes to football, bragging rights and what not.

But in here it's a back and forth of nitpicking, hypocrisy and double standards. A never ending eye for an eye. Posters complaining about team X doing this when 2 weeks earlier it was the other way around.

I know there shouldn't be back seat modding but a bit of self policing wouldn't go astray.

Trigger

[Deleted User] wrote: »

He called a manager of a rival team a serial loser, as they had just their 6th final in a row. He deserves all that crap that was typed about him and then to be thrown under the bus by the admins?

Do me a favour.

You are mixing up Mac and Mick but your point stands

Skylinehead

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The After Hours threads on the 8th Amendment were moderated to an exceptionally high standard imo. Any user causing disruption was thread banned for a period and that was that. I think thread bans from the Liverpool / Utd superthreads would be very helpful in that regard. Next thread starts up, thousands of posts and potentially a couple of months later they can join back in the discussion. If they're getting thread banned from multiple iterations of the superthread each season then it will be obvious that they are the problem child.

I consider the United/Liverpool divide to be massively accentuated by a small number of people, single digits, who are little more than trolls when it comes to the "other" team. I'm obviously not going to name and shame, but would thread bans for these few persistent troublemakers be feasible I wonder? For the other teams club threads it would be easy enough, where it gets dicey is match threads. Especially the horror that is Man United-Liverpool match threads.

LuckyLloyd

Deleted User wrote: »

He called a manager of a rival team a serial loser, as they had just their 6th final in a row. He deserves all that crap that was typed about him and then to be thrown under the bus by the admins?

Do me a favour.

One side of this argument seems to want to ignore all context and history and seems to forget that people can read posts in other threads at the same time as engaging in conversation in another. I'm not having the posts in the Liverpool super thread post final whistle on Sat as innocent posts. The context is there across the threads, across the season, across the history of the posters involved. I believe the powers that be saw through it clearly and took appropriate action to a difficult situation.

bucketybuck

Nixonbot wrote: »

Mod: This is borderline personal abuse itself, I suggest you be very careful here.

I would love to know how that is "borderline"?

Poster - Here are examples of clear and direct personal abuse
Response - He deserved it

LiamoSail

Nixonbot wrote: »

Mod: This is borderline personal abuse itself, I suggest you be very careful here.

There's 100 ways you could have phrased that but you chose the most condescending. Why?

This is a feedback thread, I'm not questioning a mod decision, I'm questioning the unnecessarily harsh, condescending tone. There's no need for it amongst adults.

LuckyLloyd

Nixonbot wrote: »

I consider the United/Liverpool divide to be massively accentuated by a small number of people, single digits, who are little more than trolls when it comes to the "other" team. I'm obviously not going to name and shame, but would thread bans for these few persistent troublemakers be feasible I wonder? For the other teams club threads it would be easy enough, where it gets dicey is match threads. Especially the horror that is Man United-Liverpool match threads.

We want to push these 'for the bantz' type spates of conversation into the match threads however. The perception of "owned" and "neutral" space is important, it's certainly how posters perceive the forum on both sides of the divide. I know who you're talking about, as I said earlier it's a small cohort of posters who have an ongoing "battle" to fight. I believe a thread ban framework for the superthreads would highlight them fairly quickly. OR they'd realise they're going to get pinged and avoid trying it on in the opposition super threads: win win.

MD1990

astradave wrote: »

Being called a paedo and sex offender?

You cannot make excuses for that level of personal abuse. He hadn’t even posted in the thread, didn’t come in and goad or bait and yet he was personally abused.

I didn't I was responding to the post I quoted.

I have no idea if he was called a paedo etc.

Mods should have banned him for a day or two after the final. He was posting non stop trying to goad some posters.

Boom_Bap

Nixonbot wrote: »

I consider the United/Liverpool divide to be massively accentuated by a small number of people, single digits, who are little more than trolls when it comes to the "other" team. I'm obviously not going to name and shame, but would thread bans for these few persistent troublemakers be feasible I wonder? For the other teams club threads it would be easy enough, where it gets dicey is match threads. Especially the horror that is Man United-Liverpool match threads.

Temp thread bans I think would be something to consider.
Repeat offenders get a perma thread ban.

Lord TSC

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Well, SlickRic would never do that. I think understanding that helps to understand why this incident was handled how it was.

Sorry, but SlickRic HAS posted plenty in the United threads straight after losses and bad results, usually telling United fans about where weaknesses in squads lie. Now, I'm not saying there's not some genuine thought behind those posts, but the sentiment shown by Ric has often echoed what Mac posted the other night.

I'd be expecting such further interjections from him after United losses to be yellow carded immediately in the future, and a good examination of whether he should be allowed mod afterwards too.

Meanwhile, let's not pretend the other Pool fan isn't prone to such posts as well. Example, straight after a 2-2 draw with Leicester.

Thanx 4 The Fish wrote: »

That was hilarious....

No attempt at a discussion, just a post match shot. And didn't get called a sex offender or retard for his "contribution" to the discussion.

If we're going to say mods should be above showing their colours or interacting with other fans, fine, but lets not act like some are holier than others, and let's not act as if the reaction Mac generated on SAturday was not a massively hyperbolic one that was handled very, very poorly.

Skylinehead

bucketybuck wrote: »

I would love to know how that is "borderline"?

Poster - Here are examples of clear and direct personal abuse
Response - He deserved it

LiamoSail wrote: »

There's 100 ways you could have phrased that but you chose the most condescending. Why?

This is a feedback thread, I'm not questioning a mod decision, I'm questioning the unnecessarily harsh, condescending tone. There's no need for it amongst adults.

Lads, individual mod actions, be it in the feedback thread or otherwise, are not up for discussion, it was ever thus. No condescension, I was actually trying to be lenient.

GavRedKing

Modding soccer is probably the second hardest job on the site after AH but you have to look at the charter as a guideline, it can not encompass every possible scenario or situation where someone will be carded or banned.

In an ideal world, there would be no charter and we could self police the forum but its one of the only forums I know of where people have pickedup multiple cards throughout the years and not being banned from the forum on the basis of the accumulation of cards we run, which is pretty fair IMO as depending on the day, cards can fly like confetti.

Which brings me round to another point, we could slim down or cut the charter to its basic elements and enforce a "dont be a dick" rule but I'm willing to bet as soon as someone is carded for something that isnt in the charter, you'll have a rules lawyer fighting the Mods/Cmods/Admins on the back of it.

bucketybuck

MD1990 wrote: »

I didn't I was responding to the post I quoted.

I have no idea if he was called a paedo etc.

Thats convenient, since you were posting in the thread at the time and posted this regarding said poster.

I think it is more embarrassing spending your saturday night on a forum trying to annoy Liverpool fans.

Mick seems to have a lot of free time. It is quite sad.

Think I remember a post where it hinted Mick was in his 40's also. Odd behaviour