Yellow card in Soccer Forum

El Gato De Negocios

Hi. I have received a card in the SF that I dispute. I have discussed with the mod in question and he has advised that he will not be overturning the card. Offending post and location below.

Aye, thats it.

Its gas, people around here were mocked for suggesting there would be riots around the area when the title was confirmed. I dont know about anyone else but mass brawls, police being attacked, property being burned and people getting stabbed over the course of the celebrations between Wednesday night and when City lost against Chelsea would indicate riotous behavior to me.

Link to thread where it was posted.

PM exchange with the mod as follows.

Dear Statutory Ape,

You have been warned for ignoring a moderator's instructions.

Discussion can become heated, we don't object to that, but when a moderator issues a warning on a thread to reign things in, it stops a heated discussion from turning into a mess.

For more information please refer to the Boards.ie FAQ.



DM_7

Moderator Note

Part of a series of posts that are clear point scoring and bringing up bad feelings.

Morning.

Just wanted to query the card if thats ok. The "offending" post was discussing something that directly relates to the premier league and it wasnt made to score points. I even made a follow up post agreeing with Drumpot and what he had said about every club having a section of idiot fans. Previously, when some people had suggested there would be riots in Liverpool should the league be restarted they were openly mocked by LFC fans on the forum. I was not aware that addressing something that had previously been said and subsequently proven to be true was a cardable offence.

If I had posted that Liverpool hadn't a hope of ever winning a league title under Klopp at the start of the season and someone brought it up after they won, would that be deserving of a card? I certainly wouldnt think so. Part and parcel of any forum is people addressing historic posts that either come true or not so carding for it is very harsh imo. Just because posts shine a light on the unsavoury elements that come clubs have, particularly one of the big clubs, it does not equate to point scoring. If more Chelsea fans were found to racially abuse people on a train like they were after a game a few years ago would that be something that couldn't be discussed in an adult manner?

If I had posted it in the LFC thread then arguably it could be cardable but it was in the general thread and i do not believe that commenting on something that actually happened without using any abusive language or calling out anyone specifically is worthy of a card.

I respectfully ask that you review the card and rescind it.

Cheers,

SA

Thank you for the PM. I am not willing to overturn the card.

In terms of the thread - Mods have given warnings about point scoring, baiting, trolling etc and the thread will not be turned into a 'battle' between groups of posters.

The post warned was clear point scoring by making the issue about what posters may have said in the past.

Thanks for coming back to me.

So essentially a post that is not abusive, is not calling anyone out and is discussing something that actually happened is a cardable offence because it referenced previously made comments in the forum, again i point out without name checking other users directly?

Does that not completely fly in the face of the very core of any forum ie people discuss other posts that were made?

I accept your general point however in my view the question of how a forum would operate is broader than what your questions suggest.

In my judgement the intent of the post warned was not to have engage in a discussion with anyone who made such points in the past, rather a point scoring exercise that goes against the warnings in the thread.

I appreciate that is only my view and I have no problem with you asking someone else to look at it.

Sound, thanks for taking the time to review anyway, I am going to bring it to the DRP as I do not agree with your interpretation. As i said, it was commentary made on actual events and in response to previous posts, it was not abusive and it was not calling anyone out specifically and i feel it sets a very dangerous precedent for the forum and site in general.

All the best,

SA

So the crux of the card is that the mod feels my post was used as a point scoring exercise against rival fans because it referred to posts that were previously made. As i mentioned in the PM exchange, a forum at its core is the exchange of views and opinions. It is about people discussing and referencing comments that were made by other users.

Once the posts are not personal and/or abusive then nothing should be off limits, obviously within the forum topic at hand. The post I made was following events that unfolded after a premier league game and was posted in the general premier league thread so was on topic and relevant to the the thread it was posted in.

It was not inflammatory or derogatory, it was not personalised ie aimed at one poster(s) in particular, it was not abusive nor did it contain abusive language.

I made reference in our PM exchange to racism and Chelsea fans that were filmed racially abusing a black man a few years ago. Any anti social behavior by football fans is a topic worthy of discussion in a football centric forum once the normal "dont be a dick" rules are adhered to.

There is a very slippery slope being traversed here, if cards can be given for referencing posts that were made previously, does that apply to all previous posts regardless of content? If users cannot call out previous comments that ultimately prove to be false (once its not done in an abusive or personal fashion) then that completely and utterly stifles any kind of discussion. If I had gone in with a "nah nah nah nah, you were wrong" and quoted other users approach then I could sort of see why the card was fair but just because some users do not like what is being said it does not mean its a cardable offence.

Tokyo

I'll let the CMods know.

El Gato De Negocios

Thanks Mike. It's the weekend so no panic.

Mickeroo

Hi I have given the PM discussion and both yours and the mods reasoning a proper read and I can't see any reason to overturn the card here.

The mod did not have issue with you referring to previous posts rather that you seemed to be just trying to rile up liverpool fans by painting them in a negative light due to the actions of a small few. I would agree with this interpretation of your posts and it contravenes the warnings that had been posted previously in the thread.

So I'm choosing to uphold the card. You can appeal to have an admin review if you wish.

If your card is not overturned by the admins or you choose not to appeal further I will also be applying a one month ban as you had two cards earlier this season on your previous account so your total for the season is 3 rather than 1.

Thanks.

El Gato De Negocios

Hi mickeroo.

I have to ask why you have made this interpretation because if you look at the post, nothing that I said painted the entire Liverpool fanbase as anything.

Below is the post in question.

Aye, thats it.

Its gas, people around here were mocked for suggesting there would be riots around the area when the title was confirmed. I dont know about anyone else but mass brawls, police being attacked, property being burned and people getting stabbed over the course of the celebrations between Wednesday night and when City lost against Chelsea would indicate riotous behavior to me.

Where in that post does it say anything about the entire Liverpool fan base? It is purely and simply commenting on things that are in the public domain and the comment was made in a matter of fact and non confrontational / abusive manner.

1) people were mocked in the forum when it was suggested there could be public order issues in the city following a title win

2) there were public order issues in the city following the title win

Applying a card for making a statement of fact in a non partisan thread without personalised, abusive or insulting language is absolutely preposterous. The backbone of any forum is to challenge or agree with what others have said. Just because posts that are 100% correct and accurate cause certain sections to get offended does not mean that sanctions are warranted or reasonable, or that forum rules have been breached. If that approach was taken across the site then there wouldn't be much of a site.

Shutting people down that have not broken any of the site or forum rules just because certain groups don't like reading something that isn't fawning platitudes about a given subject is the antithesis of what boards is about. Things are posted on boards I don't like but just because I don't like them does not mean the poster is deserving of a card.

Mickeroo

I don't see any other reason to bring it up than to rile. It's likely there would have been public order offences regardless of who won the league, to make out it's significant in the manner you have is to score points as per the in thread warnings as far as I can see.

As I said you can have an admin review my decision

El Gato De Negocios

Mickeroo wrote: »

I don't see any other reason to bring it up than to rile. It's likely there would have been public order offences regardless of who won the league, to make out it's significant in the manner you have is to score points as per the in thread warnings as far as I can see.

As I said you can have an admin review my decision

The thread was running as follows.

Poster commented that a member of the Liverpool team was burgled the night of the trophy presentation.

I replied to him mentioning the video id seen on twitter of a mass brawl outside the stadium from the same night.

Different poster replied to me including a link to the video, I then made the comment above.

I don't get what you mean where you said "to make out its significant in the manner you have"?

I didn't make out anything or insinuate anything other than exactly what was reported in the media. There were buildings set on fire, there was a stabbing, police were attacked. There was no embellishments or exaggerations in my post.

By the very nature of a discussion forum, things will be posted that "rile" up others. If I went into a US politics thread and said trump was the greatest president in US history im sure many people would be riled up or offended but that doesn't mean me saying it should face censure.

Is boards now in the "im offended" space where anything is open to mod action, even if the posts aren't abusive, derogatory or flaming and they are factually correct?

If I'd said something like "typical Liverpool fans" or made the comment in the LFC megathread then grand, I'd accept the interpretation that it was made with the sole intention of antagonising rival fans but commenting on something that was previously said, in a non abusive, non personal way, in a catch all forum thread I do not accept the interpretation.

"I'm offended" is not an acceptable reason to card someone.

If you are not going to overturn the card then id like to appeal to an admin.

Thanks for your time.

Tokyo

I'll take a look at this tomorrow morning, my time, if you don't mind waiting.

El Gato De Negocios

No trouble, cheers.

Tokyo

Apologies for the delay with this Statutory Ape, I thought I would get to it before now.

I'll keep this brief - I am going to overturn the card.

I can certainly see how "Its gas, people around here were mocked for suggesting there would be riots around the area when the title was confirmed" might raise eyebrows in the mod camp. But that alone isn't enough to presume intent on your part. Other than that shaky introductory statement, the rest of your post is referring to actual inarguable events that unfolded after a game is referring to the individuals engaged in that and is not tarring all supporters with the same brush.

Could people take offense from it - yes, but that can be said for most things in life. Weighing up your post in its entirety, I think you're entitled to the benefit of the doubt here.

Lifting the card now, and marking this as resolved.