Feedback Thread 2018

GavRedKing

jayo26 wrote: »

You mean I can't see all the pages?

You should see the filth that goes on here

Sex & Sexuality

Adamocovic

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.

Mac?? Is that you? hahaha!

If it is, I'm disagreeing with you because maybe the above is what you meant but it's not what you said.

You said every club has "idiots", but the club in question had "some nasty characters".

There is a clear difference between the two. Plus the phrasing could have been a lot better.


EDIT: Haha yeah like Osarusan said, disagree with Mac's comments. I thought I had just uncovered a huge conspiracy :P

The_Kew_Tour

Getting rid of the a Super Threads is just letting the small minority win.

Adamocovic

Adamocovic wrote: »

Mac?? Is that you? hahaha!

If it is, I'm disagreeing with you because maybe the above is what you meant but it's not what you said.

You said every club has "idiots", but the club in question had "some nasty characters".

There is a clear difference between the two. Plus the phrasing could have been a lot better.

Nope. They are MrMac's comments. I was just quoting it as I disagree with them.

robarmstrong

GavRedKing wrote: »

You should see the filth that goes on here

Sex & Sexuality

lads it has sex written TWICE in the forum name

bound to be class...

Another well done from here for the swift admin action. Fair play.

Adamocovic

Deleted User wrote: »

Nope. They are MrMac's comments. I was just quoting it as I disagree with them.

Thought I had stumbled upon mod's with secret back-up accounts :P

Like my edit said, meant I disagreed with MrMac's comments in that situation, despite it going un-carded.

yabadabado

yabadabado wrote: »

If someone goads you or trolls a thread it's basically free reign to abuse them anyway you see fit?

Some of the stuff said to a few posters Saturday night was a disgrace and totally warranted red cards.An admin stepped in and demods someone yet couldn't go back and give red cards.

Doesnt matter if you agree with the demodding or not,that lad got dogs abuse.

I mentioned the abuse was OTT, I was allegedly "going against the grain"

StringerBell

robarmstrong wrote: »

lads it has sex written TWICE in the forum name

bound to be class...

It's more tame then you might imagine..........NOT!!!

Jokes it really is.

Minderbinder

pjohnson wrote: »

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.

If you find yourself unable to post in a rival thread maybe take a look at yourself. Plenty of posters can.

I think I’m ok because I don’t post frequently. Thanks for your concern though. I just wanted to give my thoughts (for what it’s worth) because after 30 something pages of ‘feedback’ I haven’t seen too much in the way of solutions.

I was merely making a suggestion that moves discussion into a neutral zone, rather than killing that discussion. I think we’d find the General PL thread takes on a new life. Maybe that would also lead to more threads opening up about stories or individuals from all clubs, without everyone rushing into team threads.

Fans can obviously offer insight on rival threads but if the posters are well known to have allegiance elsewhere it can either be a bit too diplomatic or a bit too hostile.

Adamocovic

Minderbinder wrote: »

I think I’m ok because I don’t post frequently. Thanks for your concern though. I just wanted to give my thoughts (for what it’s worth) because after 30 something pages of ‘feedback’ I haven’t seen too much in the way of solutions.

I was merely making a suggestion that moves discussion into a neutral zone, rather than killing that discussion. I think we’d find the General PL thread takes on a new life. Maybe that would also lead to more threads opening up about stories or individuals from all clubs, without everyone rushing into team threads.

Fans can obviously offer insight on rival threads but if the posters are well known to have allegiance elsewhere it can either be a bit too diplomatic or a bit too hostile.

That's an issue, but I can't see that changing. Even fans of certain clubs have a reputation for their style of views within their own fan base.

Can cause people to either dismiss their views, even if they use logic, and also get a bit snappy and personal with them.

But honestly can't see the forum doing too much for the reputations people gain.

KevIRL

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.

I've said it before and now I'll say it again. 5starpool for mod

5starpool

KevIRL wrote: »

I've said it before and now I'll say it again. 5starpool for mod

Thanks for the input Kev.

Shanotheslayer

Talisman wrote: »

There's the option of ignoring the user (Add to Ignore List functionality), then you don't see what they post unless somebody quotes them.

The only issue I have with the functionality is that it's site wide which can be a bit infuriating because outside of the Soccer Forum the same people can be quite normal.

KevIRL wrote: »

I've said it before and now I'll say it again. 5starpool for mod

The fact he can post with a closed account means he's got a lot of power already

s3rtvdbwfj81ch

KevIRL wrote: »

I've said it before and now I'll say it again. 5starpool for mod

it's a no brainer at this stage

I heard he tried to buy the 6Starpool account early on saturday.

Is it ok to question a particular mod on this thread? This is to all mods present in here.
I won't say any names if it's not appropriate.

It relates directly to Saturday just to note

No names but hard not to figure it out

The mod in question was the one who issued the yellows on the Liverpool thread. These should have been clear reds as per charter but they were not.

And the same mod issued me the same punishment for when I spoke of Mrmacs banning on the Utd thread.

I would like an answer as to why?
And he's a Liverpool fan to note, was he concerned of actually enforcing the charter and giving fellow fans reds instead of Yellows?

I think it's a fair enough question to ask, I can imagine he's well respected among certain groups of posters because of this.

If we speak of moderator bias and so many think Mr Mac had Utd bias then I think another mod has shown the same bias for the opposite team.

Beasty

M!Ck^

I tried to address some of those points earlier:

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)

Beasty

Beasty wrote: »

M!Ck^

I tried to address some of those points earlier:

I was missing some of the post and have updated

And I also would like to know if this will be answered

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=107139129&postcount=48

Beasty

M!Ck^ wrote: »

And I also would like to know if this will be answered

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=107139129&postcount=48

I don't know. A lot of questions has been asked in this thread and I, along with a number of the mods, have been trying to deal with them. It is though a fast-moving thread, and I think an answer has been provided, even if not in direct response to that post. The only point I would re-iterate now is that Saturday's incident was indicative of a number of issues that have built up over an extended period. The context of the particular thread in which the post was made is also very relevant.

For now though I owe MrMac a reply to some questions he has asked me via PM, as well as explaining to him a little more of the issues that have arisen as we have perceived at an Admin level. That is my current priority on the site, and I certainly feel he should be getting a response as we've been a little stretched and I know he was asking similar questions of another Admin who again has been busy with real life issues

Moist Bread

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Is it ok to question a particular mod on this thread? This is to all mods present in here.
I won't say any names if it's not appropriate.

It relates directly to Saturday just to note

No names but hard not to figure it out

The mod in question was the one who issued the yellows on the Liverpool thread. These should have been clear reds as per charter but they were not.

And the same mod issued me the same punishment for when I spoke of Mrmacs banning on the Utd thread.

I would like an answer as to why?
And he's a Liverpool fan to note, was he concerned of actually enforcing the charter and giving fellow fans reds instead of Yellows?

I think it's a fair enough question to ask, I can imagine he's well respected among certain groups of posters because of this.

If we speak of moderator bias and so many think Mr Mac had Utd bias then I think another mod has shown the same bias for the opposite team.

You should name him. This thread should be about transparent feedback. Let's get this stuff out in the open so we can all get to the bottom of it.

What is the stance of boards on people colluding together on off site platforms to attack and troll others on here?

Will I Am Not

If you single out a person to call them a derogatory/offensive name, you should expect a red. Since when has this become a grey area? It should be the most blatantly black and white rule on the forum.

Will I Am Not

Moist Bread wrote: »

What is the stance of boards on people colluding together on off site platforms to attack and troll others on here?

That’s still happening?

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Either the soccer needs to have a poster clear up, or the soccer should just be light moderation free for all.

There are a number of posters, maybe less than 10, in the soccer, who work as a team with impunity to make torment on some posters. There are also some who have the guns out for one Mod for as long as I can see - this is also not acceptable. I think every one would know who they are, and for me they should be swept out.

The modration has been too hands off lately.

This is a feedback thread for the past year, not a lynching thread for last weekend. Which is what seems some want it for. If the dog will be shot, the one who poked constantly with the stick should also in my opineon

StringerBell

Will I Am Not wrote: »

That’s still happening?

Yup

Necro

Moist Bread wrote:

What is the stance of boards on people colluding together on off site platforms to attack and troll others on here?

Eh, wut?

redzerdrog

Pathetic if true but have you anything to back this up?

Will I Am Not

Will I Am Not wrote: »

That’s still happening?

Saddos out there alright I heard :cool:

Agent Coulson

Some feedback.


Get rid of the Thanks button!

hufpc8w3adnk65

Lots of stuff has been thrown at me the last few days and im not going to make any comment on them here and now. Ive seen plenty of posters from all across boards complain about the moderation of Soccer. I obviously know this area and have come up with some suggestions to improve and level out the moderation inconsistency's, Some people might be aware of the way moderation works, others may not. Heres my issues and proposed changes

Firstly mods have too, where possible let the lads know in the chat thread when you are not available, All mod’s are volunteers but if last Saturday all the mods who were unavailable had of posted in the chat thread as to their unavailability (on a big night I’m not talking about say a random Monday) a plan could have been put in place and I would have made sure to have my laptop to hand as opposed to just a phone.

When posts are reported, an emailed notice goes to mods, a chat thread is created where ALL reports of that post go and this feature isn’t really used. I propose that when a Mod/CMod/Admin checks a reported post they comment in that thread. Be it “Nothing here” or “Post Edited” or “Yellow Issued” or “Straight Red issued” can also include things like 3rd yellow 2 week ban in here also. It allows complete transparency amongst the entire team and if any mod is being heavy handed towards a certain fan base the inconsistencies in their modding will be plain as day for all to see and should make the entire soccer board more uniformed. Mods/Admin’s can see a post that was under actioned OR over actioned, who exactly actioned it and then go directly to that mod. And when a new mod starts they’ll see how others are dealing with similar issues across the board AGAIN making the moderation more uniform.
Where this also comes in handy is, as touched on above, a Mod is busy in real life for a few hours and opens his emails or the reported posts tab’s and sees 50 reported posts. He, at this stage has no clue, have these been seen/actioned. At times a border line post may get reported and in the current set up, you don’t know if an another mod has looked and not actioned OR didn’t get a chance to check as he was busy also. Posts can easily fall through the gaps here. In the system I propose, rather than link to the post on the thread, he clicks on the chat and see’s User123 reported this post as abuse , The questionable post will be quoted and then below he can see MOD 123 has commented “Yellow issued for abuse” and he’s finished with that reported post then and moves to the next, UNLESS he takes issue with over action or under actioning, then he follows that up with the mod in question to find out why. It should speed up the process for lads rather then having to click each individual post to check for a card in the thread, constantly opening new tabs. Then if a Mod isn’t online for 24 hours he knows exactly how far the actioned posts have gotten.

Mickeroo

M!Ck^ wrote: »

I fear if it was shared the soccer forum would blow up further

Drop this line of discussion please. It's nothing to do with feedback. PM it to a mod, cmod or admin if you want but alleged happenings off site won't be discussed here. Thanks.

redzerdrog

M!Ck^ wrote: »

I fear if it was shared the soccer forum would blow up further

Better than hearsay and insinuations in my opinion. At least if everything blows up at the same time there is a fresh start so to speak rather further nonsense like this continuously coming up when people have disagreements.

redzerdrog

Mickeroo wrote: »

Drop this line of discussion please. It's nothing to do with feedback. PM it to a mod, cmod or admin if you want but alleged happenings off site won't be discussed here. Thanks.

Apologies only seen this after the post. However IF that type of **** is happening it needs to be addressed.

Ulysses Gaze

Too much carding for insulting players. I get the need to card for insulting posters.

But if a player acts like a scumbag on the pitch...you should not be carded for calling them a scumbag.

Or for using a player or a managers well known, well used nickname.

That, to me, is micro-modding.

Liam O

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Too much carding for insulting players. I get the need to card for insulting posters.

But if a player acts like a scumbag on the pitch...you should not be carded for calling them a scumbag.

Or for using a player or a managers well known, well used nickname.

That, to me, is micro-modding.

Using nicknames I think should be carded as the majority are derogatory.

I'd agree somewhat on the scumbag thing though it's a hard line to draw.

PhlegmyMoses

Just got a chance to read the updates from today, and having critcised earlier, think its only fair to say that, despite the prohibitive initial message to not speak about the weekend, the mods and admins have been pretty candid in their dealings throughout this thread. Fair play

corwill

I'm not going to claim to be any kind of saint, I've picked up a couple of yellows in my time. Nothing that keeps me awake at night wracked with guilt, but (iirc) I couldn't say they weren't a fair cop under the rules.

There's no defending personal abuse, or people losing the rag, or straight up trolling, or picking a row. Notwithstanding what went on lately, that sort of straightforwardly abusive or aggressive behaviour is usually fairly manageable and moderateable. There's a breach of the charter, and a prescribed punishment follows.

What's a huge drag on the few threads I regularly pay attention to on here isn't that sort of posting, though. It's the sort of weird, passive-aggressive, obtuse behaviour that people shun just as much in the real world as they would outright aggression. There's no charter in the pubs or social circles I frequent, normal people just don't associate with weird, sniping bullies, who believe they're being clever, but are transparently seeking to insult the intellligence of whoever their vindictiveness is targetted at today. Those sorts tend to be ignored until they go away, or are told to eff off.

But those people don't just go away online. Good luck to the powers that be here trying to legislate that sort of carry-on out of existence, because the sort of semi-sly types I'm talking about (and there are plenty of them, every superthread seems to have a few) are more than happy to make up with persistence what the strict wording of any charter will deny them in terms of more direct lines of attack. They delight in derailment and obtuseness, and are persistent in their efforts (typically such individuals seem to have bags of time on their hands), allowing the low hum of their nastiness to just build and build until eventually they get on someone's wick and get precisely the sort of reaction they're looking for.

Whether you stitch a 'dont' be a d!ck' rule into the charter or not, this is your website, and it's up to you who you want around the place. You can make the charter as long and complicated as you like, it's ultimately up to yourselves who you have around the place. This thread is already a shambles, with plenty of bar-stool lawyering and mewling over the charter, while displaying no self reflection, self awareness or consistency. If you're left wondering why there are people running around ruining the place, they're there because you keep them around.

That's just my admittedly vague 2 cents, but I'm after 48 hours solid at work and a couple of glasses of wine, so I'm off to slip into a coma.

blueser

Is there any reason why, when you report a post, you don't get the courtesy of a reply clarifying why action is or (more probably in my experience) is not taken. I find that frustrating.

Trigger

blueser wrote: »

Is there any reason why, when you report a post, you don't get the courtesy of a reply clarifying why action is or (more probably in my experience) is not taken. I find that frustrating.

That would be some amount of work for volunteers to undergo in fairness.. even just taking Saturday and Sunday, 2 days, over 100 reports, I’d imagine it would take a hell of a lot of time each day to be sending PM’s to users about reported posts.

I do get where you are coming from though, reporting a post that is trolling/wumming only to see no action taken can be incredibly frustrating.

PhlegmyMoses

astradave wrote: »

That would be some amount of work for volunteers to undergo in fairness.. even just taking Saturday and Sunday, 2 days, over 100 reports, I’d imagine it would take a hell of a lot of time each day to be sending PM’s to users about reported posts.

I do get where you are coming from though, reporting a post that is trolling/wumming only to see no action taken can be incredibly frustrating.

I think the issue at hand is that people don't see the output from their reports. Lad is trolling, you send report, don't know what the outcome is.

I get both sides of this argument. On the one hand, why should mods have to let every person that reported (could be ten people reporting the same post) the outcome. Also why hang a poster out to dry when the issue is really between them and the mods?

On the other hand, it is a bit discouraging if somebody reports and doesn't feel like any action has been taken, why bother reporting in the future if that's the case? Hard one to make a decision on what the right course of action is

bucketybuck

I would have thought the more discouraging thing is that you don't know if the report was even looked at. Its seem unreasonable to think that sending a report warrants a personal response, but its a pity the software doesn't seem to allow for some sort of automatic "read receipt".

It's pretty clear Liverpool and Utd fans don't generally mix well on here. It's getting worse too.

JoeA3

Feedback:

Can the spelling of the F-word using alternate means such as using ù rather than “u” be added to the swear filter / jar?

I may well be alone but it grinds my gears / makes me die a little inside when I trudge through posts which liberally bypass the swear filter by this means. One serial offender is a mod if I’m not mistaken....

PhlegmyMoses

bucketybuck wrote: »

I would have thought the more discouraging thing is that you don't know if the report was even looked at. Its seem unreasonable to think that sending a report warrants a personal response, but its a pity the software doesn't seem to allow for some sort of automatic "read receipt".

Yeah fair shout. I guess the issue is if the technology doesn't allow this. Are we expecting a volunteer to laboriously copy and paste a PM to 10-15 users that their report has been received or actioned or whatever? If the technology allows this, should be implemented site wide as it is 100% frustrated to not get any sort of feedback or dialogue on a report

blueser

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

I think the issue at hand is that people don't see the output from their reports. Lad is trolling, you send report, don't know what the outcome is.

I get both sides of this argument. On the one hand, why should mods have to let every person that reported (could be ten people reporting the same post) the outcome. Also why hang a poster out to dry when the issue is really between them and the mods?

On the other hand, it is a bit discouraging if somebody reports and doesn't feel like any action has been taken, why bother reporting in the future if that's the case? Hard one to make a decision on what the right course of action is

That's certainly happened in my case. I've picked a few warnings/bans in the past. Some of them warranted, others (in my opinion) not. You then report a poster for committing a similar "offence", only to see no action taken and no explanation as to why. That's happened on a few occasions. All I'm after on here is fair and even handed moderation. My experiences on here lead me to suspect that that isn't always the case.

Kimbot

bucketybuck wrote: »

I would have thought the more discouraging thing is that you don't know if the report was even looked at. Its seem unreasonable to think that sending a report warrants a personal response, but its a pity the software doesn't seem to allow for some sort of automatic "read receipt".

That would be impossible to manage in fairness. What if an admin clicked into it and just decided it's best left to local mods etc, you would get a read receipt but then who's to say the local mod even looked at it after.

Agent Coulson

Question

What happens if one poster decides to just continually report another posters posts to try and get them carded is there a check on this?

bucketybuck

Kimbot wrote: »

That would be impossible to manage in fairness. What if an admin clicked into it and just decided it's best left to local mods etc, you would get a read receipt but then who's to say the local mod even looked at it after.

But what happens after isn't my concern or any of my business. I will simply have to trust that whoever looked at it made a decision they felt was right, whether that be to take action, leave it for a local mod, or to do nothing at all.

I wouldn't expect to be informed, but at least I would know the thing actually got sent.

Trigger

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Question

What happens if one poster decides to just continually report another posters posts to try and get them carded is there a check on this?

Abuse of the report function is against the charter I’m sure, so I’d presume they have some sort of list or something

PhlegmyMoses

RoboKlopp wrote: »

It's pretty clear Liverpool and Utd fans don't generally mix well on here. It's getting worse too.

In my opinion, there are a handful on either side that are super tribal and perpetuate the us against them mentality. They struggle with what they see as incursions on their superthread when a rival fan enters and find it difficult to debate with anybody that doesn't fit into the echo chamber. I've had it myself a few times going into the Liverpool thread with legitimate posts and have either been ignored or told to head on. I'm sure you've had similar on the United thread.

The focus should be on cracking down on tribalism within these small groups in a basic way; by keeping it civil. The "well you're Liverpool and yous are ****e" responses should be clamped down on in the face of reasonable discussion. Again, easier said than done, but we have all seen these types of discussions boil over. I actually don't mind the slagging after a loss, par for the course, it's the shut down of discussion because of who you support that causes the major issues for mods.

Maybe I want to discuss whether 4th and a final is enough for Klopp and whether expectations will go up, or whether Conte is on the outs, or whether getting rid of Wenger will actually help Arsenal. But there is nowhere to do this as a rival fan because people are very hostile once they know who you support.

bucketybuck

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

Yeah fair shout. I guess the issue is if the technology doesn't allow this. Are we expecting a volunteer to laboriously copy and paste a PM to 10-15 users that their report has been received or actions or whatever? If the technology allows this, should be implemented site wide as it is 100% frustrated to not get any sort of feedback or dialogue on a report

No, I wouldn't expect a mod to reply at all, it would purely be an auto response. I'm no computer geek but it seems all the components are there, the system knows who sent the report and knows when it was actioned, so why not generate an automatic email whenever that 2nd step happens?

I'm only musing though, I doubt the soccer mods are going to change website technology.