Feedback Thread 2018

LiamoSail

Lord TSC wrote: »

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.



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.

I certainly think the demodding was correct, but I'd love to hear how the above is any different to what Mac did?

Different rules for some mods is it??

Trigger

MD1990 wrote: »

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

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

That’s strange as you are saying he deserved it, and the posts in question are right there in that post you quoted too.

MD1990 wrote: »

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

It’s even stranger that you know this for certain but you can’t recall the the abusive posts, selective viewing indeed.

bucketybuck

GavRedKing wrote: »

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.

Every possible scenario or situation? Is that an attempt to dismiss the question asked? Because we are not talking about some random, never before seen scenario needing interpretation here, we are talking about clear and obvious personal abuse not being dealt with as per the existing charter.

Tom Mann Centuria

Consistency is the one thing I'd like. But rigidly enforcing the charter (as I'd be in favour of) gets just as many complaints in feedback forums, if previous years is anything to go by.

Boom_Bap

GavRedKing wrote: »

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.

A more slim charter is something worth looking at, from my time as AH mod I found more instances of rule lawyers when there was a more substantial wall of text that could be used as a pick n mix in defense.


When you engage with a user after enforcing the don't be a dick rule, you can help them understand where they have been a dick and hopefully they will cut it out in future.

MD1990

bucketybuck wrote: »

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

astradave wrote: »

That’s strange as you are saying he deserved it, and the posts in question are right there in that post you quoted too.



It’s even stranger that you know this for certain but you can’t recall the the abusive posts, selective viewing indeed.

Its the first I have heard of him being called a paedo etc.

Posts must have been deleted. I never saw them.

Whether you believe me or not is up to you. Doesn't bother me.
I will say calling him that is definitely too far though.

LuckyLloyd

Lord TSC wrote: »

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.



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.

As I posted earlier, you have some attachment to a moderator being your own man. I don't care that we have Liverpool mods or have any attachment to mods on an individual basis. But I'm going to flat out disagree with you on the assertion that Slick would ever troll, the lad loves his football and has been typing out long thoughtful posts on here for a very long time. Him coming in after a match and posting a long respectful analysis of where a club stands does not compare to Saturday night and prior behaviour - which you seem eager to ignore.

The Thanx post was posted in a match thread, a shared space. So again that doesn't equate.

Nah, not buying what you're trying to sell here.

bucketybuck

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

Consistency is the one thing I'd like. But rigidly enforcing the charter (as I'd be in favour of) gets just as many complaints in feedback forums, if previous years is anything to go by.

Rigidly enforcing the charter would be handing out red cards for even the slightest hint of trolling or personal abuse. Here we are talking about posters being directly called *****, peados, and scumbags, way past any "hint". The posts are right there to be seen.

Please don't tell me this will be swept under the carpet of "Its a grey area, who knows what is best to do...". Personal abuse is supposed to be a red card, why were the posts quoted earlier not judged to be red cards?

GavRedKing

Boom_Bap wrote: »

A more slim charter is something worth looking at, from my time as AH mod I found more instances of rule lawyers when there was a more substantial wall of text that could be used as a pick n mix in defense.


When you engage with a user after enforcing the don't be a dick rule, you can help them understand where they have been a dick and hopefully they will cut it out in future.

Its definitely something I'll bring to the team to consider, the mods and regular posters are pretty much veterans at this stage, so would know whats acceptable and whats not, its the newer users that could fall foul of a slimmed down charter however but maybe a more lenient approach, shot across the bow to new users could work.

LuckyLloyd

LiamoSail wrote: »

I certainly think the demodding was correct, but I'd love to hear how the above is any different to what Mac did?

Different rules for some mods is it??

I think where it was posted was different. But you know, if people want to make a case against Thanx they should go and make it. Go to the CMods / Admins like Beasty and Zaph and argue your point and any examples you have to hand. If he can justifiably be removed on the basis of it, fair play. I wouldn't care if the case stacked up just because I'm a Liverpool fan and he's a Liverpool mod.

Because that's what happened on Saturday - people complained and made their case and the decision was made.

GavRedKing

bucketybuck wrote: »

Rigidly enforcing the charter would be handing out red cards for even the slightest hint of trolling or personal abuse. Here we are talking about posters being directly called *****, peados, and scumbags, way past any "hint". The posts are right there to be seen.

Please don't tell me this will be swept under the carpet of "Its a grey area, who knows what is best to do...". Personal abuse is supposed to be a red card, why were the posts quoted earlier not judged to be red cards?

I could probably find out, if given enough time, how many red cards were issued in the forum for the year, I'm willing to bet its under 20.

A red card comes with an automatic 2 week ban, assuming you've no other mod actions, a longer ban if you've other yellows that "season".

Most reds issued would be discussed before handing them out as they are severe enough in their own right before going down the route of 1/3/6 month bans.

Skylinehead

bucketybuck wrote: »

Rigidly enforcing the charter would be handing out red cards for even the slightest hint of trolling or personal abuse. Here we are talking about posters being directly called *****, peados, and scumbags, way past any "hint". The posts are right there to be seen.

Please don't tell me this will be swept under the carpet of "Its a grey area, who knows what is best to do...". Personal abuse is supposed to be a red card, why were the posts quoted earlier not judged to be red cards?

I'll admit that we don't follow the charter to the letter. Should we? That's entirely up for discussion here, along with rewriting parts of it. For instance, I don't think I've ever applied this:

Abusing through the thanks system (thanking abusive posts)

Could have handed out yellows like confetti on Saturday based on the above. Maybe we should.

gimli2112

I didn't see what went on after the champions league game but I do remember Mac came onto the Liverpool thread a few months back and handed out some ludicrous cards. I don't remember it being malicious but it murdered the thread for a week. The personal abuse thrown at people however is stupid and serves no purpose.


The Liverpool Man Utd thing isn't that big a deal and is often blown out of proportion. There's no hive mind at work here either. People aren't automatically t*****s just because they started supporting a certain football team as a child, ffs.

Skylinehead

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I think where it was posted was different. But you know, if people want to make a case against Thanx they should go and make it. Go to the CMods / Admins like Beasty and Zaph and argue your point and any examples you have to hand. If he can justifiably be removed on the basis of it, fair play. I wouldn't care if the case stacked up just because I'm a Liverpool fan and he's a Liverpool mod.

Because that's what happened on Saturday - people complained and made their case and the decision was made.

Actually, as Zaph says, it went much deeper than just Saturday.

Boom_Bap

GavRedKing wrote: »

Its definitely something I'll bring to the team to consider, the mods and regular posters are pretty much veterans at this stage, so would know whats acceptable and whats not, its the newer users that could fall foul of a slimmed down charter however but maybe a more lenient approach, shot across the bow to new users could work.

For newer users, getting them to engage in discussion via PM about why action has been taken against them I felt always gave them a better lie of the land than pointing to the charter.
The outcome of the discussion can go a few ways, the user doesn't listen, they do and any card can be rescinded if there is a good middle way met.

LuckyLloyd

Nixonbot wrote: »

Actually, as Zaph says, it went much deeper than just Saturday.

Oh I don't doubt that for a second, and I've said it a couple of times in this thread already. The arguments against the demodding are utterly bankrupt once one considers context and history. It's a real bad look arguing against the decision imo.

MD1990

Lord TSC wrote: »

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.



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.

Beginning to now realise how you so easily give out cards at times.


I got banned for this before from you just for my opinion.

As a mod you have to try to be impartial whether it is a Man Utd or Liverpool fan/poster.

osarusan

gimli2112 wrote: »

The Liverpool Man Utd thing isn't that big a deal and is often blown out of proportion.

I am not a fan of either team, and I completely disagree. In the aftermath of a bad performance or result from either team, it's just a stream of low-level goading and gloating from the same handful of posters again and again. It's absolutely painful to read in match threads (I basically never bother going in to club threads). They've been around long enough to know what they are doing and how it will be reacted to.


Put faith in the mods to distinguish that crap from the proper discussion, and allow them to temporarily thread-ban those doing it (I imagine everybody knows it when they see it, even if it doesn't quite match a particular rule on the charter).


Get another mod to review the grounds for that temp thread-ban later, to see if it was justified.

bucketybuck

GavRedKing wrote: »

I could probably find out, if given enough time, how many red cards were issued in the forum for the year, I'm willing to bet its under 20.

A red card comes with an automatic 2 week ban, assuming you've no other mod actions, a longer ban if you've other yellows that "season".

Most reds issued would be discussed before handing them out as they are severe enough in their own right before going down the route of 1/3/6 month bans.

I'm not sure I see the relevance, why does it matter how many were handed out previously? Were the quoted posts red card offences or not?

Nixonbot wrote: »

I'll admit that we don't follow the charter to the letter. Should we? That's entirely up for discussion here, along with rewriting parts of it. For instance, I don't think I've ever applied this:



Could have handed out yellows like confetti on Saturday based on the above. Maybe we should.

Again, how is this relevant? I didn't ask how other offences are dealt with, I asked why the personal abuse quoted was not deemed to be red card worthy.

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.

osarusan

osarusan wrote: »

I am not a fan of either team, and I completely disagree. In the aftermath of a bad performance or result from either team, it's just a stream of low-level goading and needlingn from the same handful of posters again and again. It's absolutely painful to read in match threads (I basically never bother going in to club threads). They've been around long enough to know what they are doing and how it will be reacted to.
.

Goading is a good word, thank you. They are even goading people in their own thread for the disagreeing. If you poke the dog with the stick, soon he will bite and you can shoot him!

LuckyLloyd

Deleted User wrote: »

Goading is a good word, thank you. They are even goading people in their own thread for the disagreeing. If you poke the dog with the stick, soon he will bite and you can shoot him!

The targeting of bangkok in the Utd thread is also not a good look.

LuckyLloyd

So I think there's a compelling suggestion sketched out above for thread banning as an addition to the moderator's toolkit.

And a slimmed down charter with more leighway to the mod team along "don't be a dick" lines.

Boom_Bap

Boom_Bap wrote: »

For newer users, getting them to engage in discussion via PM about why action has been taken against them I felt always gave them a better lie of the land than pointing to the charter.
The outcome of the discussion can go a few ways, the user doesn't listen, they do and any card can be rescinded if there is a good middle way met.

The problem is not just newusers. Your veterans have made the goading into art, and the newuser is often taken in.

Cantona's Collars

Call me paranoid but there seems to be a cohort of posters in the Liverpool thread that are deemed too valuable to ban. Their word is gospel and even new arrivals on said thread have to toe the line as defined by these lads or are bullied off the thread.
What went on Saturday night went beyond what is acceptable on any level.
If I posted in reply to someone "I believe you are trolling", I'd get a yellow card.
The other night,posters were called paedophiles,spastics,cnuts yet got the same punishment.
As was said earlier, certain mods were nowhere to be seen as this went on but if United fans carried on the same way as certain pool fans did they'd be down on them like a ton of bricks.
The United thread is seeing less and less users and over the weekend quite a few regular posters who've been around years said enough is enough and are either leaving or just not bothering posting on it.
They may have lost the game but the cretinous behaviour gave some a small victory.

yabadabado

Lord TSC wrote: »

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.

Sums it up perfectly.

Soccer forum is going to die off rapidly if something isn't done.

The_Kew_Tour

When you have posters think calling somebody a Peado is acceptable you're wasting your time trying engage in debate on other things.

Lord TSC

Ah, MD, thats hilarious really. You've kept that all this time? I presume you appealed it via PM if you had an issue with it, kicked it on then to the c-mods and admins, and so on? Quoting one post when I've clearly said in the message to you the card was for your overall contribution. Good man there, but if you're going to try such things, at least try to hide the fact you're only giving part of that story, yeah?

pjohnson

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

As I posted earlier, you have some attachment to a moderator being your own man. I don't care that we have Liverpool mods or have any attachment to mods on an individual basis. But I'm going to flat out disagree with you on the assertion that Slick would ever troll, the lad loves his football and has been typing out long thoughtful posts on here for a very long time. Him coming in after a match and posting a long respectful analysis of where a club stands does not compare to Saturday night and prior behaviour - which you seem eager to ignore.

The Thanx post was posted in a match thread, a shared space. So again that doesn't equate.

Nah, not buying what you're trying to sell here.

Why do you keep mentioning the club thing. I couldn't give a flying donkey shít who disciplines me if I've done something thick that warrants action. A lot of Pool fans recieved a lot of yellows this year whinging over getting yellows (as did some in the Everton thread and a United poster left the forum aswell over it)....if you are whinging over yellows you get a card...thats one of the few consistently enforced rules.

A huge issue was made over Mac being a United fan for enforcing this rule.....which is a rule be it Mac, Gav, Thanx, blueser that enforces it.

LuckyLloyd

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

Call me paranoid but there seems to be a cohort of posters in the Liverpool thread that are deemed too valuable to ban. Their word is gospel and even new arrivals on said thread have to toe the line as defined by these lads or are bullied off the thread.
What went on Saturday night went beyond what is acceptable on any level.
If I posted in reply to someone "I believe you are trolling", I'd get a yellow card.
The other night,posters were called paedophiles,spastics,cnuts yet got the same punishment.
As was said earlier, certain mods were nowhere to be seen as this went on but if United fans carried on the same way as certain pool fans did they'd be down on them like a ton of bricks.
The United thread is seeing less and less users and over the weekend quite a few regular posters who've been around years said enough is enough and are either leaving or just not bothering posting on it.
They may have lost the game but the cretinous behaviour gave some a small victory.

This is mad, it's such a warped prism to view the forum through.

LuckyLloyd

pjohnson wrote: »

Why do you keep mentioning the club thing. I couldn't give a flying donkey shwho disciplines me if I've done something thick that warrants action. A lot of Pool fans recieved a lot of yellows this year whinging over getting yellows (as did some in the Everton thread and a United poster left the forum aswell over it)....if you are whinging over yellows you get a card...thats one of the few consistently enforced rules.

A huge issue was made over Mac being a United fan for enforcing this rule.....which is a rule be it Mac, Gav, Thanx, blueser that enforces it.

Because it is driving a huge amount of this discussion. The attempt to try and isolate posts and point them to charter rules absent of context and history is ludicrous.

Boom_Bap

Deleted User wrote: »

The problem is not just newusers. Your veterans have made the goading into art, and the newuser is often taken in.

New users, in all forums, need to find the lie of the land. They will not know the 'in' jokes, they wont know the traits/trends, they won't know who is a goader.
That's where I think a PM exchange with them if they step outside the charter from the initial goading would help them settle better.

Cantona's Collars

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

Call me paranoid but there seems to be a cohort of posters in the Liverpool thread that are deemed too valuable to ban. Their word is gospel and even new arrivals on said thread have to toe the line as defined by these lads or are bullied off the thread.
.

And you don't see it is just like this in the Manchester thread?

Cantona's Collars

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

This is mad, it's such a warped prism to view the forum through.

So give me an opposing argument to counter that view. It's one that's held by many on here.

GavRedKing

The way I see it, theres probably 3 ways to approach the charter and continued use of the forum.

1 - follow it to the letter : would result in lots of cards/bans and I dont think it would work TBH.
2 - allow a free for all : Boards wont allow it, first off, but lets say it happens, then you're posting in a void where people are just name calling and being dicks 100% of the time and it turns into a battle ground without much debate other than childish insults and WUMing. As it stands that doesnt happen very often.
3 - Continue as is, trust the mods and the 99% of good posters: The charter is hardly perfect and not everything is actioned but just because it isnt doesnt mean its gone unnoticed either, the majority of posters here arent out to troll and point score either. We all know we're not going to co-exist in a perfect utopia of a forum, its far too divided for that and soccer at its very core is tribalistic but try at least be considerate when posting and go back to the Boards rule, "dont be a d**k"

yabadabado

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.

bucketybuck

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Because it is driving a huge amount of this discussion. The attempt to try and isolate posts and point them to charter rules absent of context and history is ludicrous.

Trying to excuse personal insults such as cunt, scumbag and peado by citing "context" is also ludicrous.

pjohnson

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Because it is driving a huge amount of this discussion. The attempt to try and isolate posts and point them to charter rules absent of context and history is ludicrous.

A huge amount of discussion is about the chronic inconsistencies in any kind of rule enforcement. Highlighting posts that breach charter and weren't disciplined per charter is surely one of the whole points of this thread.

LiamoSail

MD1990 wrote: »

Beginning to now realise how you so easily give out cards at times.


I got banned for this before from you just for my opinion.

As a mod you have to try to be impartial whether it is a Man Utd or Liverpool fan/poster.

Laughable that that sort of innocuous post would see anyone banned.

How Soon Is Now

[Deleted User] wrote: »

And you don't see it is just like this in the Manchester thread?

Ive been in the United thread for years both as a lurker and poster. I used to think there was a clique talking down to certain posters but after a while it became fairly clear it was something else.

If someone seems to be "targeted" in there it's normally because there trying to go along with something different to everyone else. I get we have different views that's fine but it's got to the point where your getting people who do it because it's part of there posting style.

I've seen plenty posters debating over issues that's different.

LuckyLloyd

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

So give me an opposing argument to counter that view. It's one that's held by many on here.

The opposing arguments are above should you wish to see them. Utd fans are not some oppressed minority population on the forum suffering constant injustices and hypocrisies because the powers that be adjudge there to be a:

"a cohort of posters in the Liverpool thread that are deemed too valuable to ban"

That's mad stuff. I don't doubt there's a vocal minority of regulars in the Utd thread who believe this, but so what? I've been posting here for over 11 years, and it simply isn't the case. Opr was an exceptional poster, a Liverpool fan but he was permanently banned. Nuri Sahin had a huge following, he's gone. And there are plenty more over the years.

But once you get into your way of thinking it becomes a self defeating spiral. Because your behaviour will be influenced by it; that behaviour will receive sanction; and it will confirm your view. I don't particularly care to disabuse you of your view, I only care that it doesn't incorrectly inform moderator policy for the forum as a whole.

bucketybuck

LiamoSail wrote: »

Laughable that that sort of innocuous post would see anyone banned.

That post got the same yellow card as this:

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

The clear implication is that posters should go all in with the abuse, in for a penny in for a pound, right?

Will I Am Not

LiamoSail wrote: »

Laughable that that sort of innocuous post would see anyone banned.

It didn’t. It literally says it in the mod note.

LuckyLloyd

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.

The context here is a perception of a mod having done it before, and choosing to dig the knife in at a time where he knew emotions would be at their rawest. I commend mods and Admins for applying context correctly, I think it's absolutely how the job should be done.

Coming in here and dominating a season long feedback thread on the general direction of the forum in the hope of getting a few red cards so that 'an eye for an eye' is achieved seems a waste of the facility to me.

MD1990

Lord TSC wrote: »

Ah, MD, thats hilarious really. You've kept that all this time? I presume you appealed it via PM if you had an issue with it, kicked it on then to the c-mods and admins, and so on? Quoting one post when I've clearly said in the message to you the card was for your overall contribution. Good man there, but if you're going to try such things, at least try to hide the fact you're only giving part of that story, yeah?

I didn't appeal it.

I just noticed it in my inbox a few days ago.

If you cannot see how impartial you are as a mod it is only the SF which will suffer.

I am sure you would have quoted another post of mine if it was deemed trolling as the one you did was not a trolling post at all.

As you showed in a previous post you judge a post by who they support.

A Liverpool poster who posts negative about a Man Utd topic is deemed trolling in your eyes. Under your moderation the SF has become much less active. That says a alot.

Trigger

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Because it is driving a huge amount of this discussion. The attempt to try and isolate posts and point them to charter rules absent of context and history is ludicrous.

Lloyd, I do respect you as a poster but I really don’t think you are looking at this objectively and free of any bias. Even looking at the context or history of the discussion/poster, free reign should not be given to allow abuse that was seen on Saturday. It will set a terrible predicament, and will see the forum as a whole descend into a farce.

Calling someone a scumbag, nonce, paedo or that they should be on the sex offender register, should not just be frowned upon, it should have a zero tolerance policy. Having such a policy will allow for discussion to thrive imo

LuckyLloyd

astradave wrote: »

Lloyd, I do respect you as a poster but I really don’t think you are looking at this objectively and free of any bias. Even looking at the context or history of the discussion/poster, free reign should not be given to allow abuse that was seen on Saturday. It will set a terrible predicament, and will see the forum as a whole descend into a farce.

Calling someone a scumbag, nonce, paedo or that they should be on the sex offender register, should not just be frowned upon, it should have a zero tolerance policy. Having such a policy will allow for discussion to thrive imo

I think we can all hope a mod never goes looking for a reaction in that way again. Assuming that isn't the context of a situation, then I absolutely agree direct abuse should receive strong sanction. And I think we have a thread ban suggestion proposed that may help mitigate against these moments of white heat going forward.

Benimar

osarusan wrote: »

I am not a fan of either team, and I completely disagree. In the aftermath of a bad performance or result from either team, it's just a stream of low-level goading and needling from the same handful of posters again and again. It's absolutely painful to read in match threads (I basically never bother going in to club threads). They've been around long enough to know what they are doing and how it will be reacted to.


Put faith in the mods to distinguish that crap from the proper discussion, and allow them to temporarily thread-ban those doing it (I imagine everybody knows it when they see it, even if it doesn't quite match a particular rule on the charter).


Get another mod to review the grounds for that temp thread-ban later, to see if it was justified.

Agree 100% with this.

I'm a Liverpool fan but I read the Man U thread regularly, and its easy to identify the posters (of both teams) who engage in this. They are allowed continue as they haven't obviously breached a rule (although I do think the 'don't be a dick' rule needs more enforcing here).

These posters are not representative of either team. I know plenty of Man U supporters and we have our 'back and fourths' but it's never petty. We share a common interest in football and none of us feel the need to overly precious about 'our' team.

A thread ban is a great idea (with a review maybe the following day). The type of things that would be regarded as goading or baiting don't need to be put in the charter, just let the Mods use the rule of 'I'll know it when I see it'.

LuckyLloyd

MD1990 wrote: »

I didn't appeal it.

I just noticed it in my inbox a few days ago.

If you cannot see how impartial you are as a mod it is only the SF which will suffer.

I am sure you would have quoted another post of mine if it was deemed trolling as the one you did was not a trolling post at all.

As you showed in a previous post you judge a post by who they support.

A Liverpool poster who posts negative about a Man Utd topic is deemed trolling in your eyes. Under your moderation the SF has become much less active. That says a alot.

Lord TSC is not a soccer forum mod anymore so how is any of this relevant?

bucketybuck

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The context here is a perception of a mod having done it before, and choosing to dig the knife in at a time where he knew emotions would be at their rawest. I commend mods and Admins for applying context correctly, I think it's absolutely how the job should be done.

Coming in here and dominating a season long feedback thread on the general direction of the forum in the hope of getting a few red cards so that 'an eye for an eye' is achieved seems a waste of the facility to me.

The context here is that there should be no excuses for the type of clear and direct abuse that has already been quoted. There should be no situations where it is acceptable to call somebody a cunt, a scumbag, a peado.

That level of abuse should be a red card regardless of any context, which is probably why the charter already says that personal abuse is a red card.

Try to justify it all you want, try to deflect by questioning motives all you want, the question remains a very clear and simple one, why were clear and obvious red card offences only given yellow cards?