Feedback Thread 2018

robarmstrong

GavRedKing wrote: »

The main criteria for modding is to be a prolific/active enough poster, have a clean record and to be recognised by the Mods/Cmods/Admins as having been a good poster who could be a good mod.

The nature of Soccer and the card system we have in place can exclude a few posters from that due to them racking up cards, even if they are good posters but the local mods can pick names to send to the Admins and they'll get final say on it.

Not everyone that gets this far in the process actually wants to mod the forum and people do turn it down for a number of reasons once approached, it is, as I've alluded too, probably the 2nd hardest mod job on Boards after AH, maybe Politics but I rarely post in either forum to know enough about either.

so when does i has the starts plz?! :pac:

I would say the SF is harder to mod than AH in some aspects, especially when there's matches on, or transfers. as I'm not even joking in one match thread I refreshed the page after a minute just to see how many posts would come and there was at least 30, that's insane!! Imagine trawling through to see (if any weren't reported) were insults that went under the radar? Nightmare!

You's are doing the right thing in regards to threads like this, because at the end of the day, it's a learning opportunity for mods, admins, cmods, normal posters etc - because we all get to pop in, have our say, listen to what has to be said and come up with ideas on how to improve things around SF.

LuckyLloyd

Drumpot wrote: »

One suggestion is that You TRY (not always possible I appreciate it) have a balance of mods. If there is significant discourse on an issue fans can at least reach out to a mod but it’s important that mod has equal support. I presume most people know which team each mods support, what team has the most mods? What about a mod profile in the forum charter section with some small bits about them. Nothing too intimate but it allows people to at least not just See mods as teachers but as people putting time into trying and make this place work . Also means if I have an ongoing issue I might feel more comfortable addressing it with a certain mod.

Wrong way to think about the topic imo. It shouldn't matter who the mods support if they're doing the job properly. I find it fascinating though how much importance Utd fans seem to attach to this however.

ShooterSF

On giving it some thought my approach would be to replace the charter with the don't be a dick rule followed by some examples/guidelines as to what is a serious offence (red cards) but not exhaustive. I think this is a much better approach and I'd almost bet it's how the forum is already modded with the mods retrospectively pointing back at the charter as justification rather than enforcing it in the first place. Having a simple rule as above reduces the lawyer-ing and the inconsistencies that come from a mod pointing back at the charter after they took action for someone being a dick, where others technically broke the same rule but never saw punishment as the mods aren't actually enforcing the charter.

The second one is the super threads. I think an open and firm decision is needed from the mod team and the site as to how neutral they are. The charter makes it clear that the thread doesn't belong to any group but in reality and in enforcement of the rules that is clearly not the case. At this point I think it would be easier to consider them semi-home territory for the team's supporters with match threads and perhaps something like a Premier League super thread considered neutral ground where more open banter is allowed. Or keep them as is if you prefer, BUT make it clear at the top of every new super thread and have the mods treat them as neutral ground when enforcing the rules

PhlegmyMoses

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Wrong way to think about the topic imo. It shouldn't matter who the mods support if they're doing the job properly. I find it fascinating though how much importance Utd fans seem to attach to this however.

It's not United fans only. The reason why certain Liverpool fans got so upset at the weekend is because it was a United fan mod who posted those comments. Had it been a Liverpool fan mod the meltdown wouldn't have been as severe, if there had been any meltdown at all. So it is across the board.

Telling people how they should view things is completely unhelpful and ignores what the userbase is telling you at every turn. People absolutely check the mods credentials when they are posting normally and there is no way of getting away from this.

Will I Am Not

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Wrong way to think about the topic imo. It shouldn't matter who the mods support if they're doing the job properly. I find it fascinating though how much importance Utd fans seem to attach to this however.

I couldn’t care less who a mod supports but to suggest it’s only United fans that have the problem is ridiculous. I seem to recall a recent feedback thread where Liverpool fans were bemoaning the amount of United mods.

LuckyLloyd

Minderbinder wrote: »

Why can’t the team threads require registration with posters only allowed to register in one? Fans of rival teams going into other threads is never welcomed and it’s not necessary. We can already talk about our rivals in the General PL thread, and I reckon that thread would be conducive to a better natured discussion between rivals with it being neutral territory.

Strongly disagree with this suggestion.

bucketybuck

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Wrong way to think about the topic imo.

Its ironic that you follow that, with this:

I find it fascinating though how much importance Utd fans seem to attach to this however.

Not everybody divides the world into "United fans" or "Liverpool fans", most people are just posters posting their opinion. Whether their opinion has merit or not has nothing to do with who they support.

Its petty jabs such as the above that has led to this point, non-sequiturs thrown into a thread and left there to fester, it would help things a lot if such uncalled for jabs were modded much more harshly. I mean, what was the purpose of that statement beyond delineating "them and us"?

GavRedKing

robarmstrong wrote: »

so when does i has the starts plz?! :pac:

I would say the SF is harder to mod than AH in some aspects, especially when there's matches on, or transfers. as I'm not even joking in one match thread I refreshed the page after a minute just to see how many posts would come and there was at least 30, that's insane!! Imagine trawling through to see (if any weren't reported) were insults that went under the radar? Nightmare!

You's are doing the right thing in regards to threads like this, because at the end of the day, it's a learning opportunity for mods, admins, cmods, normal posters etc - because we all get to pop in, have our say, listen to what has to be said and come up with ideas on how to improve things around SF.

I'd be all for running an x factor style voting system for the next mod, most votes win, the Forum decides.

Although I dont think the Admins would like it

We do get some protection from re-regs due to the minimum posts and join date before requesting access, AH and other forums can be spammed to death with re-regs and serial trolls on a daily basis, so thats one thing that works form the process IMO.

Feedback threads are vital, theres no forum perfect and all we can do on the back of suggestions is make it a little better.

I've mentioned it and so have a few others but looking to condense the charter and stream line seems to be an issue, I'd be all for it anyway.

Its not going to change some of the vitriol that a tiny percentage of posters have against one another but it could be a step in the right direction.

Its a bit like peace in the middle east, this forum will never be united due to footballs tribalistic nature but we all have to be pro-active and try smooth everything out and try not to fan the flames.

LuckyLloyd

bucketybuck wrote: »

Its ironic that you follow that, with this:



Not everybody divides the world into "United fans" or "Liverpool fans", most people are just posters posting their opinion. Whether their opinion has merit or not has nothing to do with who they support.

Its petty jabs such as the above that has led to this point, non-sequiturs thrown into a thread and left there to fester, it would help things a lot if such uncalled jabs were modded much more harshly.

It's not a petty jab, a number of Utd fans in this thread seem to attach an importance to what clubs mods follow. That's commentary on the discussion from yesterday and today, and a valid one. It is also clear that many people do divide the world into "United fans" and "Liverpool fans" and "other". Check out Cantona's Collars posts from yesterday afternoon for a strong example of that viewpoint.

pjohnson

marklazarcovic wrote: »

Limit it to certain fans then, because it is partly true,some are not welcome by the majority because of their posting style. And they know it but post anyway,can only be to rile right? Get them thanks.

Thats where you are supposed to report the shít stirrers

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Wrong way to think about the topic imo. It shouldn't matter who the mods support if they're doing the job properly. I find it fascinating though how much importance Utd fans seem to attach to this however.

And again with the club thing Lloyd. You seem adamant thats an issue.

StringerBell

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Wrong way to think about the topic imo. It shouldn't matter who the mods support if they're doing the job properly. I find it fascinating though how much importance Utd fans seem to attach to this however.

Liverpool fans literally went into a meltdown at the weekend because a "United Mod" posted something in their superthread that they took issue with.

I think you may need to reconsider your feeling that it seems there are just some United fans who place irrational importance on a mods team affiliation.

From my own POV, it really doesn't matter at all who the mod supports, if everything is being done correctly it is not a factor.

LuckyLloyd

Will I Am Not wrote: »

I couldn’t care less who a mod supports but to suggest it’s only United fans that have the problem is ridiculous. I seem to recall a recent feedback thread where Liverpool fans were bemoaning the amount of United mods.

Link? If they were doing that they were also thinking about it wrong, needless to say.

LuckyLloyd

StringerBell wrote: »

Liverpool fans literally went into a meltdown at the weekend because a "United Mod" posted something in their superthread that they took issue with.

I think you may need to reconsider your feeling that it seems there are just some United fans who place irrational importance on a mods team affiliation.

From my own POV, it really doesn't matter at all who the mod supports, if everything is being done correctly it is not a factor.

Yes, a mod trolling his own forum tends to cause meltdowns.

We agree on the last part, which is my point.

Drumpot

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Wrong way to think about the topic imo. It shouldn't matter who the mods support if they're doing the job properly. I find it fascinating though how much importance Utd fans seem to attach to this however.

It shouldn't matter but its an issue if a significant number of posters think its not clear if mods are being impartial and consistent. Little to nothing has been done to address these concerns.

Transparency of rule enforcement is a major issue that has been left ambiguous and objectively questionable. There have been plenty of questions and examples highlighted here (and ignored) that show that its not purely based on paranoia.

Adamocovic

Remember the back-seat modding rule?

If you believe a post is in breach of the charter then you should report it, and move on. If you engage the poster on his/her breach of the charter you risk infraction for back-seat modding.

Examples of back-seat modding include:

• Calling someone a troll.
• Telling a poster not to post in a thread, or they should post elsewhere
• Telling a poster you have reported their post (effectively accusing them of a breach of the charter)
• Commenting on a breach of charter
• Informing a user that you have/will be putting them on your ignore list. Advising others to do the same.

This list is not exhaustive, and mod discretion may be applied in cases where the intent is judged to be helpful (for example, telling another user they should use spoiler tags for score updates, and showing them how to do so).

The rule of thumb should always be to leave moderation to the mods.

So are the people commenting and questioning why some posts received yellows for breaking a red violation on the charter rules, about to receive yellows for discussing the breach?

Wait a minute, am I going to receive a yellow for breaking the charter by discussing the breach to the charter they performed when they discussed the other breaches of the charter?....




I know this comment is just in jest, but it's just little inconsistencies in the charter that kind of make it unclear for me. I think the entire charter could do with a review of each rule and certain clarifications and changes made.

Like looking at the list there are a lot not actually followed and some you would forget are even rules. BACK-SEAT MODDING used to be more serious but find it quite common now for posters to do it. RULE DISCUSSION seems fairly common, especially this year. I have engaged with it a lot myself. OFF-TOPIC don't know what all the threads are like but for the ones I follow they can go off-topic during lulls all the time, I don't mind it, and never really see this rule enforced anymore. Sure if I remember correctly the United thread went through a pineapple pizza (or something along the lines) debate/discussion for a number of days, shows the quality of the football I suppose!

Of course like discussed many get away with breaking the abuse, trolling, and baiting posts too. But personally find it hard to take the charter seriously anymore with how we've seen quite a lot of the rules fading from moderators decision making.

That's why I think it's nearly time to just scrap the ones they don't use, add the ones needed and make any necessary changes. The next step is actually getting moderators to enforce them and users to follow them.

5starpool

One of the suggestions is to have a mod that is not familiar with the forum, its posters, or indeed the sport to moderate. This is a terrible, terrible idea, and if implemented would be the subject of this thread next year. the happenings of last Saturday night should not be used to redefine how the forum works (or doesn't) but having someone who can use no context or common sense is a terrible idea.

If in the context of a discussion in the Liverpool thread, for example, I responded to someone with a "you're some bollox" type reply, on the face of it that is abuse, but it could well be part of a humourous exchange or something that an existing mod familiar with e forum and posters would know.

Possibly a bad example, but you get the general gist. Modding should be about common sense, context where available, and light touch mostly to ensure that things keep ticking over nicely. Obviously a heavy hand will be necessary at times (like last weekend), but the idea that a mod of motors, the ladies lounge, or after hours would be able to do it better and fairer than someone within the forum is deeply flawed in my view.

LuckyLloyd

5starpool wrote: »

One of the suggestions is to have a mod that is not familiar with the forum, its posters, or indeed the sport to moderate. This is a terrible, terrible idea, and if implemented would be the subject of this thread next year. the happenings of last Saturday night should not be used to redefine how the forum works (or doesn't) but having someone who can use no context or common sense is a terrible idea.

If in the context of a discussion in the Liverpool thread, for example, I responded to someone with a "you're some bollox" type reply, on the face of it that is abuse, but it could well be part of a humourous exchange or something that an existing mod familiar with e forum and posters would know.

Possibly a bad example, but you get the general gist. Modding should be about common sense, context where available, and light touch mostly to ensure that things keep ticking over nicely. Obviously a heavy hand will be necessary at times (like last weekend), but the idea that a mod of motors, the ladies lounge, or after hours would be able to do it better and fairer than someone within the forum is deeply flawed in my view.

Completely agree of course. This just highlights how this feedback thread, which influences how the site should be run for a whole season, has been hijacked by Saturday's incident and subsequent demodding.

The arguments for strict down the line as per the charter modding are / were so that posters on Sat could be more harshly punished. But that would cause significant problems if extrapolated out over a whole season and no doubt we'd be in here next year talking about it as the big issue.

I'll just reiterate the opposing opinion: "Don't be a dick"; some forum specific procedural stuff; and away you go.

osarusan

I'll apply for mod, here's my CV.

thebaz

DM_7 wrote: »

Certainly if someone repeatedly says the same thing it should be pointed out that they are effectively spamming and asked to stop. If evidence was provided to a mod from regulars who see it, they would surely look at it?

that was done time and time again - to no effect - in fact that was the problem - the thread was then allowed turn to rubbish

adox

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Completely agree of course. This just highlights how this feedback thread, which influences how the site should be run for a whole season, has been hijacked by Saturday's incident and subsequent demodding.

The arguments for strict down the line as per the charter modding are / were so that posters on Sat could be more harshly punished. But that would cause significant problems if extrapolated out over a whole season and no doubt we'd be in here next year talking about it as the big issue.

I'll just reiterate the opposing opinion: "Don't be a dick"; some forum specific procedural stuff; and away you go.

Its unfair to say its been hijacked. It was obvious it would be top of the agenda and the delay in getting any replies only exacerbated it.

I also think you are being totally disingenuous with your assertion that people are looking for strict down the line modding. No matter what team your support, the vast majority of those yellows handed out were reds all day long.


You seem to be trying to muddy the waters in this whole thing when it is clear as day and even the admins have said so and offered an apology for the handling of it.

Drumpot

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Completely agree of course. This just highlights how this feedback thread, which influences how the site should be run for a whole season, has been hijacked by Saturday's incident and subsequent demodding.
.

That's completely disingenuous.

The CL final game wasn't the issue, it was the culmination of not addressing a festering issue throughout the last few months.

The issue of perceived double standards has been around a lot longer then Saturday night. Some respected posters and former mods feel that this issue has been going on since before last season. In your own words, it shouldn't matter what club they are from. If it was addressed last seasons feedback you wouldn't be having to read about this year . .

Iused2likebusts

StringerBell wrote: »

Liverpool fans literally went into a meltdown at the weekend because a "United Mod" posted something in their superthread that they took issue with.

I think you may need to reconsider your feeling that it seems there are just some United fans who place irrational importance on a mods team affiliation.

From my own POV, it really doesn't matter at all who the mod supports, if everything is being done correctly it is not a factor.

The problem at the weekend is that a mod is supposed to put out the flames not fan the flames. I couldn't care less what he said and I've never reported a post or I'd imagine never had a post of mine reported. Obviously a fair proportion of posters on the SF get overly worked up over certain things people say. So a mod has a thankless task and to that end needs to try stay out of the tit for tat stuff that goes on. As people on all sides seem to be very emotional about this stuff. I'm not in anyway excusing what followed and that should be dealt with accordingly .

Beasty

GavRedKing wrote: »

Although I dont think the Admins would like it

Correct!

It's never going to be a popularity contest, and I suspect you could then get certain posters canvassing to get "one of theirs" into power to protect "their interests"

Popular posters as mods is great, but we need to try and identify mods who will oil the wheels, making this a better place. Who you support is really irrelevant, except that there are clearly 2 clubs that generate most discussion and issues around here. Having mods who partake in relevant discussions, and can moderate in an unbiased fashion, is the aim. I think the current mod team are very good at that, but I do know there was some friction within the team over recent months because different positions were being taken, resulting in inconsistent moderation and disharmony among the userbase. We have a bit of time before the new season and I am hopeful we can get things to settle down a bit in the meantime (although the WC does often throw up some heated moments resulting from player allegiances based on club followings)

One of the problems with this forum (and indeed society in general) is people often go looking for something to complain about. One man's banter becomes another mans trolling. Just because someone wants to discuss a team they do not support does not automatically mean they are tolling. Yes there was a particular sensitivity on Saturday evening, with one set of fans licking their wounds, and another putting the boot in. The problem was, I suspect, that any comments from "opposing" fans were always likely to rouse the ire.

Those doing the goading should have backed off, as indeed should those reacting to it. By getting involved you are either enjoying it (which is akin to trolling) or stirring the fire. I appreciate things often get said in the heat of the moment during a match. However there's no harm in retracting comments on reflection, apologising to those offended, and indeed putting some thought into what is posted particularly during the after match "cool-down" period

It was very unfortunate the way things turned out with MrMac, but we all make mistakes. We made mistakes in hoping he could moderate in a way that would not create issues, and I'm sure he will acknowledge (again possibly with hindsight) that the way he went about things was not conducive to a peaceful/harmonious forum (not that I think we will necessarily achieve that any time soon but it is a nice objective to aim for)

Trigger

GavRedKing wrote: »

I'd be all for running an x factor style voting system for the next mod, most votes win, the Forum decides.

DM_7

thebaz wrote: »

that was done time and time again - to no effect - in fact that was the problem - the thread was then allowed turn to rubbish

I see now why people lost interest in the thread.

HandsomeBob

Drumpot wrote: »

That's completely disingenuous.

The CL final game wasn't the issue, it was the culmination of not addressing a festering issue throughout the last few months.

The issue of perceived double standards has been around a lot longer then Saturday night. Some respected posters and former mods feel that this issue has been going on since before last season. In your own words, it shouldn't matter what club they are from. If it was addressed last seasons feedback you wouldn't be having to read about this year . .

Opposing fans on boards moaning about double standards has been going on a lot longer than since before last season.

That's why I'm finding it hard to take some of the complaints I'm seeing seriously.

Drumpot

HandsomeBob wrote: »

That's why I'm finding it hard to take some of the complaints I'm seeing seriously.

This is actually a fair reflection of how people feel some of the issues being highlighted are being addressed. "Not taking the complaints seriously" is not really addressing the problem though is it ?


In fairness to some of the mods they are engaging and accepting mistakes have been made, for that there is hope this can be resolved.

robarmstrong

Beasty wrote: »

Correct!

It's never going to be a popularity contest, and I suspect you could then get certain posters canvassing to get "one of theirs" into power to protect "their interests"

Ah c'mon I'll buy ye a spicebag I swear :pac::pac: a day-cent one!!!

Beasty wrote: »

Popular posters as mods is great, but we need to try and identify mods who will oil the wheels, making this a better place. Who you support is really irrelevant, except that there are clearly 2 clubs that generate most discussion and issues around here. Having mods who partake in relevant discussions, and can moderate in an unbiased fashion, is the aim. I think the current mod team are very good at that, but I do know there was some friction within the team over recent months because different positions were being taken, resulting in inconsistent moderation and disharmony among the userbase. We have a bit of time before the new season and I am hopeful we can get things to settle down a bit in the meantime (although the WC does often throw up some heated moments resulting from player allegiances based on club followings)

That aim can definitely be achieved, whether it's by popular posters being mods or outsiders coming in, as previously stated the major disadvantage being outsiders not knowing the inside jokes, personal banter, cliques but hopefully the likes of cliques will be abolished because it genuinely is quite frustrating, like I said before, no poster or group of posters is bigger than the forum itself so the sooner that can be knocked on the head the better.

Beasty wrote: »

One of the problems with this forum (and indeed society in general) is people often go looking for something to complain about. One man's banter becomes another mans trolling. Just because someone wants to discuss a team they do not support does not automatically mean they are tolling. Yes there was a particular sensitivity on Saturday evening, with one set of fans licking their wounds, and another putting the boot in. The problem was, I suspect, that any comments from "opposing" fans were always likely to rouse the ire.

Agree, no matter what there will always be someone who will take offence and situations like Saturday evening don't help, the last thing someone licking their wounds is a group of people rubbing it in, it's unfair and unnecessary, especially for those considering themselves grownup. A bit of banter (it'll be your year next year lads) could be tongue in cheek with a bit of tough luck, well done anyways though, get me?

Beasty wrote: »

Those doing the goading should have backed off, as indeed should those reacting to it. By getting involved you are either enjoying it (which is akin to trolling) or stirring the fire. I appreciate things often get said in the heat of the moment during a match. However there's no harm in retracting comments on reflection, apologising to those offended, and indeed putting some thought into what is posted particularly during the after match "cool-down" period

Agree again, goading? Nope, playful banter? That's fine, but far too many get wrapped in it and it just becomes a shitstorm afterwards. Threads like these though give us all the opportunity to reflect and see feedback hopefully implemented.

pjohnson

Now that mistakes are being acknowledged will any further changes be happening mod wise? Now that sense is prevailing I'd be very interested to know who thought the yellow for nonce was correct in the first place and why, we've now seen mods admit they would have handled it very different. But no explanation as to why some moderator only issued a yellow? It seems one moderator has slipped woefully out of touch with moderating?

GavRedKing

Beasty wrote: »

I think we need to take a bit of time out to consider what we do. Some have posted indicating they don't want retrospective action. Others have the opposite view. Some of the mods have already indicated they may well have acted differently. Other mods have certainly confirmd in the mods forum that with more time they would probably have applied harsher sanctions for some of the posts

I'm personally tending towards some retrospective action, but only on posts that were abusive to other users (unless I'm missing something else that may appear particularly heinous)

pjohnson wrote: »

Now that mistakes are being acknowledged will any further changes be happening mod wise? Now that sense is prevailing I'd be very interested to know who thought the yellow for nonce was correct in the first place and why, we've now seen mods admit they would have handled it very different. But no explanation as to why some moderator only issued a yellow? It seems one moderator has slipped woefully out of touch with moderating?

See above.

HandsomeBob

Drumpot wrote: »

This is actually a fair reflection of how people feel some of the issues being highlighted are being addressed. "Not taking the complaints seriously" is not really addressing the problem though is it ?


In fairness to some of the mods they are engaging and accepting mistakes have been made, for that there is hope this can be resolved.

Good thing it's not my job to take it seriously!

What I mean is that I'm guess I'm hardened at this stage to the baiting as it happens in cycles as teams achieve fluctuating success. From that perspective, I don't have any real issue with the state of the forum. I get the enjoyment I want out of it without getting bogged down by any BS going on in the background.

super_furry

So just now news broke that Chelsea have put their plans for a new stadium on hold due to the ‘current economic climate’. Now obviously the speculation is going to be that Roman Abramovich is pulling funding because of his visa problems in the UK and that Chelsea could be in huge trouble, especially if he decides to make a point and call in the money the club owe him.

But where do I talk about this as a non-Chelsea fan now? Going into the superthread and bringing that up would be seen as trolling and it’s things like that I think have led to a big stiffling of discussion and helped to further entrain a ‘then and us’ mindset.

GavRedKing

super_furry wrote: »

So just now news broke that Chelsea have put their plans for a new stadium on hold due to the ‘current economic climate’. Now obviously the speculation is going to be that Roman Abramovich is pulling funding because of his visa problems in the UK and that Chelsea could be in huge trouble, especially if he decides to make a point and call in the money the club owe him.

But where do I talk about this as a non-Chelsea fan now? Going into the superthread and bringing that up would be seen as trolling and it’s things like that I think have led to a big stiffling of discussion and helped to further entrain a ‘then and us’ mindset.

Come in and join us, its hardly trolling.

I have my opinion on it and you've outlined the gist of it in the visa issue.

Thanx 4 The Fish

super_furry wrote: »

So just now news broke that Chelsea have put their plans for a new stadium on hold due to the ‘current economic climate’. Now obviously the speculation is going to be that Roman Abramovich is pulling funding because of his visa problems in the UK and that Chelsea could be in huge trouble, especially if he decides to make a point and call in the money the club owe him.

But where do I talk about this as a non-Chelsea fan now? Going into the superthread and bringing that up would be seen as trolling and it’s things like that I think have led to a big stiffling of discussion and helped to further entrain a ‘then and us’ mindset.

Only if you go in there and decide that you want to poke fun at Chelsea fans and suggest that they are done etc etc. If you go in there and engage as you would with someone down the pub or at home with a Chelsea supporting friend/partner and attempt to discuss as a rational adult without trying to stick the boot in then you will be sound.

Trigger

pjohnson wrote: »

Now that mistakes are being acknowledged will any further changes be happening mod wise? Now that sense is prevailing I'd be very interested to know who thought the yellow for nonce was correct in the first place and why, we've now seen mods admit they would have handled it very different. But no explanation as to why some moderator only issued a yellow? It seems one moderator has slipped woefully out of touch with moderating?

You can check who gave the yellow by clicking on the yellow card on the full site. And he has already given his explanation here a page or 2 back(might be more) I’m not gonna name names obviously but it’s easy enough to check out

Trigger

super_furry wrote: »

So just now news broke that Chelsea have put their plans for a new stadium on hold due to the ‘current economic climate’. Now obviously the speculation is going to be that Roman Abramovich is pulling funding because of his visa problems in the UK and that Chelsea could be in huge trouble, especially if he decides to make a point and call in the money the club owe him.

But where do I talk about this as a non-Chelsea fan now? Going into the superthread and bringing that up would be seen as trolling and it’s things like that I think have led to a big stiffling of discussion and helped to further entrain a ‘then and us’ mindset.

I actually think something like this could have it’s own thread even, it could have huge implications for Chelsea as well as any other Russians that own business/clubs in the UK.

Other than that constructive posts will be more than welcome in most superthreads

osarusan

super_furry wrote: »

But where do I talk about this as a non-Chelsea fan now? Going into the superthread and bringing that up would be seen as trolling and it’s things like that I think have led to a big stiffling of discussion and helped to further entrain a ‘then and us’ mindset.

I don't think this is the case to be honest.


I hope and think that the mods, and most users, can distinguish posts that are trolling to get a reaction from genuine comment that sore posters try to portray as trolling.

Kiith

I've gone into opposing fans threads loads of times, and rarely been greeted with anything other than helpful answers (and occasionally a light slagging, which is no part of the fun). Locking down threads isn't a good idea imo. You may as well go back to individual forums in that case.

Though, i'm ok if you want to give us back our forum :P

GavRedKing

I've setup a thread for the recent Chelsea news, lets not clutter up this Feedback thread, cheers.

pjohnson

astradave wrote: »

You can check who gave the yellow by clicking on the yellow card on the full site. And he has already given his explanation here a page or 2 back(might be more) I’m not gonna name names obviously but it’s easy enough to check out

Ah ok didnt know that.

Adamocovic

Since this is a feedback thread I'm hoping it's fine for me to give mine regarding the ban to MrMac84.

I missed all the CL final commotion. Was off to the pub for the day with Villa, Leinster and CL. Then nursed myself on the Sunday for my sins. So I hadn't seen what caused him to lose his mod status and the fans to flip out.

First heard of it in the United thread. I'd like to think my opinion isn't bias however since I've had my fair share of disagreements with MrMac84 and we've PM'd before regarding some of the modding during the year, such as when the United thread was locked during the game.

I know he has gained a reputation for himself for going over there a bit to comment, and a lot of Pool fans aren't happy with it, but some agree with his views and engage in civil debates. After reading this thread and the reactions I thought I'd have a look back to see what kicked it all off. Expected him to have gone on a drunk abusive rant or something in the Pool thread.

Unless I've missed something, or the post has been deleted, the one that kicked it off was nowhere nearly as bad as I was expecting. The comment was where he disagreed that Pool were in great shape for next season, and gave reasons why. Some Pool fans even thanked the post. While I don't agree with his views regarding them or Klopp, it seems like the Yellow he earned and subsequent backlash was due to a comment about Klopp failing to win any final. I won't post it because no doubt the mods won't be impressed, but I suggest others wondering to judge for themselves.

If this actually is the comment that started all this mess, my word. I think the backlash was due to the fact that for a while now a lot of posters aren't happy with MrMac84's contribution to the Pool thread, due to not only his views but the widely known fact that he is a United fan. Eventually it reached boiling point and during a night where emotions ran wild people lost control and let loose. I can't speak for him and his contributions in the Pool thread, however I believe his views are genuine and he is interested in a debate rather than trolling people think he does. He clearly seems to be interested in Pool and that thread is where those interests should be directed.

Maybe I'm wrong here again but the only time I've seen him post anything humorous at their expense has been in the United thread, which to me shows he had no plans of just stirring up the Pool thread. I didn't see anything insulting or clearly aimed to incite.

The de-modding of him seems overly harsh in the context of it in my view, and the current mods are running with it as some sort of example of the good work they are trying to implement. It's just another example of something being poorly handled by them in my eyes.

There was no clear plan or preparation for how the CL aftermath was going to be handled. A disaster by all accounts. De-modding MrMac84 hasn't solved anything and I wonder will the bigger issues be dealt with, such as:

a) Are rival fans allowed to post in team threads? If a rival posts anything negative, even if other fans agree, it gets viewed as trolling.
b) Are mods allowed to discuss their own opinions honestly on the forum? This comes on to the idea that mods need to carry themselves better. If MrMac84 had of been a normal user you can bet the response would not have been the same. This doesn't absolve him of any blame, but should rules be in place on how mods can interact on the forum?

Now I agree that MrMac84 should have been more careful, especially with emotions running high, and if I've got it all wrong with the post that kicked it off I'm sorry. Some will come back saying it's not just about the post but the culmination of a year of his contributions tipped off by the emotions of the night, but whenever I did happen to see the thread it at least had seemed he wasn't doing it with the purpose of annoying rival fans. Again maybe I'm wrong here. To be fair to him he was a very active mod, something we've now lost, it will be interesting what if anything is learned from this.

I know a lot if not most will completely disagree with my views on this, but I suppose the feedback thread is here for them.

osarusan

↑↑↑

See post 20 in this thread for one that resulted in a load of responses, and people pointing out how much nonsense he was talking, at which point he doubled down on it.

Whatever about the announcement of the de-modding and the lack of reaction to the responses, and just talking about his behaviour - he was engaging in bottom-of-the-barrel, witless stirring.

Adamocovic

osarusan wrote: »

↑↑↑

See post 20 in this thread for one that resulted in a load of responses, and people pointing out how much nonsense he was talking, at which point he doubled down on it.

Whatever about the announcement of the de-modding and the lack of reaction to the responses, and just talking about his behaviour - he was engaging in bottom-of-the-barrel, witless stirring.

While I completely disagree with that comment, as every club as a select bunch of fans which are trouble, it's not unique to Liverpool.

I would mention I had not seen that as it was in the match-thread, and also went un-carded. I do believe that was by far a more card-able comment than the one in the Pool thread that was picked up on.

I'm well aware that he had a reputation among a lot of the Pool fans for numerous reasons. And the response was something that continued to grow until it all came tumbling down at the weekend, my overall point is that they will hopefully learn from this rather than think his de-modding can be used as an example.

Is there a clear moderator guideline for them to follow? I think it's dangerous for most mods to share their opinions, especially in rival threads as they are well known supporters of the rivals and not only that but the fact that they are a moderator too can create more of a tension between them and the posters.

5starpool

Also, I want to say that while didn't disagree with the decision to remove the mod from his role, I very much disagree with the public dressing down method of doing so. This serves no good from what I can see.

jayo26

If mrmac84 was demodded because seemingly this isn't the first time he has tried to bait pool fans i wonder was he actually pulled up on his actions previously by someone senior?

I don't know the ins and outs of modding or how it works but I never seen any reason for action to be taken against him before so surely he should of been made aware of it and given a strike? Or is it one strike and your out?

Adamocovic

jayo26 wrote: »

If mrmac84 was demodded because seemingly this isn't the first time he has tried to bait pool fans i wonder was he actually pulled up on his actions previously by someone senior?

I don't know the ins and outs of modding or how it works but I never seen any reason for action to be taken against him before so surely he should of been made aware of it and given a strike? Or is it one strike and your out?

I know normal users we have the Forum Charter (For all it's flaws) but is there actually a Mod Guideline/Charter?

Probably is, and sorry if it's obvious, but surely that would step in to how these situations are handled too.

GavRedKing

Adamocovic wrote: »

I know normal users we have the Forum Charter (For all it's flaws) but is there actually a Mod Guideline/Charter?

Probably is, and sorry if it's obvious, but surely that would step in to how these situations are handled too.

Ya, in the Moderators forum, theres a Moderators "How To" Guide.

Any mod on the site can access it.

jayo26

GavRedKing wrote: »

Ya, in the Moderators forum, theres a Moderators "How To" Guide.

Any mod on the site can access it.

You mean I can't see all the pages?

Adamocovic

Adamocovic wrote: »

While I completely disagree with that comment, as every club as a select bunch of fans which are trouble, it's not unique to Liverpool.

Not sure why you 'completely disagree' with what I said since the gist of what I was saying was that every fanbase will have a group of nasty characters among them.

osarusan

Deleted User wrote: »

Not sure why you 'completely disagree' with what I said since the gist of what I was saying was that every fanbase will have a group of nasty characters among them.

I think he is talking about (and disagreeing with) the post you quoted from MrMac saying how Liverpool really was different.