Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

The Soccer Forum Moderator

  • 23-01-2009 11:27PM
    #1
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭


    I just seen the locked thread here and I understand clearly why it went nowhere. BUT,

    I spend most of my time on three forums and two of those have been full of unhappy bunnies over the moderation in the soccer forum of the same person who is mentioned in the other locked thread which is on the first page of this forum. For that reason I started this thread.

    I received a warning today for putting a fail picture in a thread that I and most sensible users expected to be locked very quickly. It was locked but not as quickly as was expected. My picture also contained something which might actually support the thread title, as I have not been a fan of the subject of the thread for some time. I'm not worried about the warning I received as I don't normally mess around enough to be warned/infracted/banned. However I might now be on the radar of this moderator and that could cause me problems in the future.

    As said in the other thread it does seem that this person seems on certain days to be just ready to hand out the warnings, bans etc. and it does not seem to be carried out in a consistent manner either. I think its time that whoever decides on Moderators to have a serious look at the moderation by this moderator. I know two people got some form of infraction/ban for giving the thumbs up to a post. Is this normal?


«1

Comments

  • #2
    sceptre
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    I don't post on soccer much. But I do know that in the past few hours on Politics I've had to delete half of a full thread, handed out one temp banning, given about five infractions and five warnings.

    Some days I hand out nothing at all, some days are just silly. And silliness is catching.

    As a moderator on this site, you can assume my views are influenced by my position if you like, though it isn't so. I will say though that the moderator you're complaining about runs a good ship on Politics as a co-mod of mine and I assume takes the same standards into soccer.

    Though I don't post much on soccer I do drop in from time to time and there is the occasional day, week, or entire month where that forum is two steps away from an all-out flame-war (and I've seen enough of them to spot quite a few of the signs).

    When I give people a yellow card/warning, I usually stress to them that a yellow card is tantamount to a nudge. It's the lightest infraction that can be given and balances a nudge, which takes a few moments, with sending them a proper PM, which may take significantly longer. Most people appreciate the distinction between that and an actual infraction. The soccer forum is big enough that there are probably very few users being watched by the mods there. A nudge isn't something for the mods to remember, it's more for the poster to remember. So on that I wouldn't worry.

    However, I'm not too sure why anyone would want to bother putting a "fail" picture in a thread that was silly or potentially troublesome. What's that, just flame-fanning or an ego thing or what?


  • #3
    sceptre
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    Moved to Help Desk from Feedback by the way.


  • #4
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    I'm not worried about the warning as such, but just the fact that I might now be on course for 'special attention' from this particular mod. I'm not the only one who feels that this mod is ott and does not mod fairly across the board. The thread which I mention was closed by somebody and reopened by this mod. The fact that the thread was reopened in itself shows a lack of judgement by this person imo. Meanwhile another equally stupid thread was started regarding another manager but it was shut immedately and the mod in discussion here explained the difference between both threads.

    But in my judgement and I'd say a lot of the posters in the soccer forum they would agree that the Ferguson one should have been locked, which it was, but would also feel the same way regarding the Benitez one also.

    Edit to add this. Here is the thread that has not been closed, pay particular attention to the post 5 and all the thanks it received.
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055468715

    Thank you Sceptre


  • #5
    GuanYin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,552 ✭✭✭✭GuanYin


    We've been discussing soccer forum moderation lately and especially in respect to threadspoiling.

    We came to some conclusions, not always unanimously, but always as a majority.

    One was that too many threads get spoiled by a minority rabble mobs who don't like the subject title. They try and drown out the signal with noise to get the thread closed. That's threadspoiling, it is against the rules and it will now be policed with much greater attention. If people don't like a thread topic, either post an alternative view or ignore it.

    Regarding the two threads. The Benitez one was, if nothing else, constructed in a non-aggresive, no trolly way. It put forward an argument and made some points. There were quite a few good posts in the thread and I think the OPs point was shot down quite nicely through intelligent discussion. Some people went for the "get it locked" approach. We won't let people dictate like that. THEY will be the ones sanctioned. Noone should be afraid to express a civil, non-abusive opinion in soccer. In that case, I warned and the threadspoiling stopped. On review by another mod, it was felt that there should have been many sanctions within the thread and that I should have handed out infractions and bans. The posts sanctioned were picked independently by two mods (another mod and myself) and then the posts agreed on were dealt with. I did the sanctioning because I was the one who overlooked them to begin with. The strength of the sanctions were agreed on by at least two mods also.


    The second thread had no premise, no discussion and was created to troll. It got locked.

    As for "Special attention". I don't victimize users. If someone breaks the rules, they get sanctioned. If someone doesn't, they don't. If someone breaks the rules 3 times gets infracted each time and the breaks the rules a 4th time, will they get a stronger punishment? Yes, probably. That isn't victimization, that is good modding.


  • #6
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    There are superthreads on the soccer forum. The idea of the super threads were to keep the man united and liverpool and other club threads to a minimum or at least thats what I understood to be the reason for them.

    So now a Liverpool fan has a problem with the manager and starts a thread outside of the super thread to discuss it. Well excuse me if I think this is bad modding, and it was not kept open, it was locked but reopened by you. So obviously somebody felt it needed locking.

    I agree that the Alex Ferguson thread needed locking too. That was done.

    I just put this up because I think its in the best interests of the Soccer forum to discuss this matter. I would be a lot older than the most of the posters on the soccer forum and I understand the need for strict guidelines, I don't have a problem with my receiving a warning either. I just don't think you are modding in a fair and impartial manner across the soccer forum.

    Sometimes you see ridiculous threads remain open and other times they are closed instantly. Personally I believe you take a different approach on some occasions and then other times you seem to go all gung ho.

    Your comments regarding the Alex Ferguson thread were pretty much saying that any Alex Ferguson thread would end up with warnings etc. or at least thats the way it came across. Basically from reading your post in that thread I was of the opinion that I could not start or cannot start any thread about Alex Ferguson and his management capabilities or lack thereof. So what makes a thread on him different to the Liverpool manager?
    I'm sure you are aware that I'm not a fan of either club, I'm just concerned wtih the current state of the forum.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    GuanYin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,552 ✭✭✭✭GuanYin


    eagle eye wrote: »
    There are superthreads on the soccer forum. The idea of the super threads were to keep the man united and liverpool and other club threads to a minimum or at least thats what I understood to be the reason for them.

    1. Read the title of the so-called "Superthread" the read the OP. In fact look at the title of any "Superthread". Good. Now show me where it says that the thread is where ALL discussion of a club is to take place. Tell me where that is even implied.
    So now a Liverpool fan has a problem with the manager and starts a thread outside of the super thread to discuss it. Well excuse me if I think this is bad modding, and it was not kept open, it was locked but reopened by you. So obviously somebody felt it needed locking.
    2. The Liverpool fan had an opinion. It wasn't a popular opinion, it wasn't even a very sensible opinion imo. But it was an opinion. It wasn't team talk, it wasn't gossip and it wasn't a rumor.

    3. Regarding the locking/unlocking. The Sports Cmod locked the threads as a temporary act because of the reported posts. He then PM'd me, told me what he had done and directed me towards them for moderation.

    4. Your opinion of what passes for good moderation and ours obviously differ. The important aspect of this is, that you are not a moderator of the soccer forum.
    I agree that the Alex Ferguson thread needed locking too. That was done.
    5. I'm pleased you were satisfied with our decision.
    I just put this up because I think its in the best interests of the Soccer forum to discuss this matter. I would be a lot older than the most of the posters on the soccer forum and I understand the need for strict guidelines, I don't have a problem with my receiving a warning either. I just don't think you are modding in a fair and impartial manner across the soccer forum.
    6. Give me an example of how I have been unfair. Please give me examples of bias.
    Sometimes you see ridiculous threads remain open and other times they are closed instantly. Personally I believe you take a different approach on some occasions and then other times you seem to go all gung ho.
    7. Can you please direct me to the last 5-10 threads I have closed as examples of this.
    Your comments regarding the Alex Ferguson thread were pretty much saying that any Alex Ferguson thread would end up with warnings etc. or at least thats the way it came across.
    8. Please quote the text that you feel implied this. I have re-read what I posted and I do not see how you can make that claim.
    Basically from reading your post in that thread I was of the opinion that I could not start or cannot start any thread about Alex Ferguson and his management capabilities or lack thereof.
    9. Please highlight the text that infers that.
    So what makes a thread on him different to the Liverpool manager?
    I'm sure you are aware that I'm not a fan of either club, I'm just concerned wtih the current state of the forum.
    The reasoning is outlined in the post you just responded to. Very clearly.

    10. Assuming you take my post as 6 paragraphs. Paragraph 4 & 5 clearly state the reasoning. Paragraph 5 repeats and expands on the message supplied with the closing of the thread on Man United.


    Now, I've given 10 points to address every point and claim you've made.

    Please supply me with the requested quotes so I can further address your points.

    To help I will supply links and quotes:

    Points 8&9

    The OP
    Post
    Unearthly wrote:
    Alex Ferguson is a crap manager

    Seems to be the in thing today to slag off great managers for no reason so now it's Sir Alexs turn
    My post
    GuanYin wrote:
    The other thread was re-opened because it was an actual discussion, with, you know, like topics and points and stuff. Just because some people don't like the topics and points, doesn't mean the thread can't be discussed.

    This masterpiece, on the other hand, is trolling and the OP is getting an infraction. As will anyone else who tries the same thing.


  • #8
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    GuanYin wrote: »
    1. Read the title of the so-called "Superthread" the read the OP. In fact look at the title of any "Superthread". Good. Now show me where it says that the thread is where ALL discussion of a club is to take place. Tell me where that is even implied.

    Well I cannot be bothered anymore to look for the big discussion on the superthreads but it was my opinion from reading them that match threads and big media covered stories would be the only things outside that thread involving a club. I looked for a while and I don't know where it is.
    GuanYin wrote: »
    2. The Liverpool fan had an opinion. It wasn't a popular opinion, it wasn't even a very sensible opinion imo. But it was an opinion. It wasn't team talk, it wasn't gossip and it wasn't a rumor.

    And it wasn't in the media or the news either. I am not a fan of Benitez myself but I respect the Liverpool fans and if I want to talk about it, its either in a relevant match thread where I discuss his,imo, errors on the day, otherwise I'd bring it to the Liverpool thread.
    GuanYin wrote: »
    3. Regarding the locking/unlocking. The Sports Cmod locked the threads as a temporary act because of the reported posts. He then PM'd me, told me what he had done and directed me towards them for moderation.

    Ok
    GuanYin wrote: »
    4. Your opinion of what passes for good moderation and ours obviously differ. The important aspect of this is, that you are not a moderator of the soccer forum.

    And why post this? I'm well aware of that fact. Thats why I'm here.
    GuanYin wrote: »
    5. I'm pleased you were satisfied with our decision.

    Cool:cool:

    GuanYin wrote: »
    6. Give me an example of how I have been unfair. Please give me examples of bias.

    Well I've been looking for a number of posts by going back through your posts but none of them are there. I don't understand why not unless of course they have been deleted.

    GuanYin wrote: »
    8. Please quote the text that you feel implied this. I have re-read what I posted and I do not see how you can make that claim.
    9. Please highlight the text that infers that.

    This masterpiece, on the other hand, is trolling and the OP is getting an infraction. As will anyone else who tries the same thing


    And this reads to me like 'don't attempt to start up another Alex Ferguson thread'. If you feel thats unfair, well then maybe you should have spent the same amount of time explaining this as you did explaining why you were leaving the Benitez thread open.



    GuanYin wrote: »
    10. Assuming you take my post as 6 paragraphs. Paragraph 4 & 5 clearly state the reasoning. Paragraph 5 repeats and expands on the message supplied with the closing of the thread on Man United.


    Now, I've given 10 points to address every point and claim you've made.

    Please supply me with the requested quotes so I can further address your points.The reasoning is outlined in the post you just responded to. Very clearly.

    Well unfortunately I cannot supply these due to deletion or whatever, but what I did garner from going back through your posts is that your modding of the soccer forum is being questioned by a lot of unhappy bunnies, as I stated in my op.


    sceptre wrote: »
    However, I'm not too sure why anyone would want to bother putting a "fail" picture in a thread that was silly or potentially troublesome. What's that, just flame-fanning or an ego thing or what?

    Well personally a fail picture is telling the op that he has failed in his attempt to wind people up, which is what I made of this post with the thread title. I wasn't the only one who felt this way. However this particular fail picture had a line in it 'I find your lack of win disturbing' which was also a side swipe at Benitez and Liverpools recent draws. Basically it was telling the op that he was failing to wind people up whilst also telling those that know my opinions on Benitez that I am not backing down from my stance. I thought it was funny and thats why I posted it.


  • #9
    GuanYin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,552 ✭✭✭✭GuanYin


    eagle eye wrote: »
    Well I cannot be bothered anymore to look for the big discussion on the superthreads but it was my opinion from reading them that match threads and big media covered stories would be the only things outside that thread involving a club. I looked for a while and I don't know where it is.
    Ohh ok, so what you'e saying is, you're happy to make an accusation but not willing to back it up with..ermm facts. I'll link it for you here.

    Second line has the rules in the original post
    GuanYin wrote:
    This thread is for team talk, Gossip and Rumours pertaining to Liverpool FC. This thread is open for all users to post in. There are no preferences for fans of any team.

    So "team talk", gossip and rumors. The Benitez thread was none of those.
    Now if you want to infer that that thread is for more than what I've clearly stated, that is your choice, but the fact in plain text is the thread was legitimate as a separate thread.

    And it wasn't in the media or the news either. I am not a fan of Benitez myself but I respect the Liverpool fans and if I want to talk about it, its either in a relevant match thread where I discuss his,imo, errors on the day, otherwise I'd bring it to the Liverpool thread.
    Well that is your decision. It is not however the rules of the forum nor the thread, nor is it written anywhere in the forum or the thread that it should be so. Unless you can point me to that.
    Well I've been looking for a number of posts by going back through your posts but none of them are there. I don't understand why not unless of course they have been deleted.

    This is the most disgracefully dishonest and disingenious thing I have EVER seen posted on boards. Basicially you make an accusation, can't or won't back it up, so instead accuse me of hiding all the posts.

    So you are saying I've gone back and deleted every instance of me being unfair. Someone might have noticed. The CMOD, SMOD and my co-mods can see deleted posts and can search them too, so if you can state an instance, please describe it here and they can search. I have never and will never delete a moderation decision without telling the posters involved and the SMODS and CMOD can back me up on that so nothing was deleted.

    So again I ask, show me an instance, describe what happened in it and someone can find it. I'll even personally request in helpdesk that the Admins search the backup database if noone can find it by search, I'll open a healpdesk thread for that purpose if it can't be found by normal search. if you're going to make an accusation, do it honestly and back it up.
    This masterpiece, on the other hand, is trolling and the OP is getting an infraction. As will anyone else who tries the same thing

    And this reads to me like 'don't attempt to start up another Alex Ferguson thread'. If you feel thats unfair, well then maybe you should have spent the same amount of time explaining this as you did explaining why you were leaving the Benitez thread open.
    Well that is a case of your interpretation of text and not down to what is actually written.

    What is written "this post is trolling, the OP has been infracted for trolling, anyone else who trolls well also be infracted".

    Nowhere in the post do I mention Alex Ferguson, posting about Alex Ferguson nor do I even imply a mention of him. The only thing I imply was the post was trolly. I even specifically reference that post "this masterpiece".

    So again, read it and tell me where it actually says ANYTHING about Alex Ferguson as opposed to what you personally in your head think it might mean.

    Well unfortunately I cannot supply these due to deletion or whatever, but what I did garner from going back through your posts is that your modding of the soccer forum is being questioned by a lot of unhappy bunnies, as I stated in my op.

    Again, your accusation of deleting things is both dishonest and easily disproved. Now given the easily proved FACT that nothing has been deleted, I again ask you to show or reference the instances. If you can even mention the case you are referring to, the SMODs, CMODS and my Co-mods can search and find the posts, deleted or not.
    but what I did garner from going back through your posts is that your modding of the soccer forum is being questioned by a lot of unhappy bunnies, as I stated in my op.

    VEry good, but that isn't the accusation you made and all those instances have been reviewed.

    You specifically accused me of something, so AGAIN I ask you to find me the examples. They haven't been deleted so show them.
    Well personally a fail picture is telling the op that he has failed in his attempt to wind people up, which is what I made of this post with the thread title. I wasn't the only one who felt this way. However this particular fail picture had a line in it 'I find your lack of win disturbing' which was also a side swipe at Benitez and Liverpools recent draws. Basically it was telling the op that he was failing to wind people up whilst also telling those that know my opinions on Benitez that I am not backing down from my stance. I thought it was funny and thats why I posted it.

    Read the charter rules, the part on threadspoiling in particular and see how it relates to posting a fail picture.

    If you don't get it, let me know and I'll explain it showing you the exact text.


  • #10
    Gordon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,522 ✭✭✭✭Gordon


    eagle eye wrote: »
    Well I've been looking for a number of posts by going back through your posts but none of them are there. I don't understand why not unless of course they have been deleted.
    In that case you are admitting that GuanYin is fair as I do not see any deleted posts (I went back to August 2008 before I stopped looking) apart from those noted below.
    Well unfortunately I cannot supply these due to deletion or whatever
    What do you define as 'whatever'? The only deletions of posts by GuanYin in the last half year are:

    Finger Licking Good (thread) GuanYin posted:
    I'm not sure what the point of this thread is other than to ridicule and abuse.

    If I see another like it, the OP will be banned.
    As an addendum, I'm not going to infract or ban anyone in this thread, even though there are several charter violations. (Xavi, I'm looking at you).

    However, anyone who posted here abusing the subject of the thread can consider themselves on notice.

    Break the rules again and you will get a straight ban.
    And post 11843.5 on the Off Topic Thread relating to the closure that was then deleted due to irrelevance.
    This thread was created as a means for soccer forum regulars to interact and as a show of good faith by the forum moderators.

    I had said at the time the moment it becomes more trouble than it is worth or caused feedback threads it would be closed.

    That day has come.

    It was fun while it lasted.

    Are these the posts you're looking for?

    Incidentally, these posts weren't deleted by GuanYin.


  • #11
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    I was looking for the Pigman post, the one that got the thumbs up from so many people who got banned. That whole thread seems to have dissapeared. I also remember the same Pigman being unfairly treated imo in a thread by Guan Yin some while back. I think it was Celtic/Rangers thread. Thats two off the top of my head.

    While the same poster was at the centre of both, the banning of posters for thanking that post was ludicrous imo. It was clear as had been posted shortly after the post by somebody else that the post was a parody on words from Saipan. If you didn't know this, the fact that it got so many thumbs up should have got your suspicion going that there was something a little unusual about it. If you had read down a couple of posts you would have got your answer. But then again you have rules and can use them when you wish.
    I remember GuanYin coming into another thread and warning Pigman to stay on topic. This is the other thread I'm talking about and he was posting more than anyone else and was at the butt end of being quoted and receiving silly, immature answers, he rightly responded in kind but he got warned but the others did not.

    I actually spent more time than I would normally do looking for these last night but to no avail. Anyways I've said my piece but of course as an ordinary poster in the soccer forum who says very little in feedback/help desk I wasn't aware that I had to present a case like a court case with evidence and all to have someone take a look at the modding.

    My reasons for doing this are very clear in the op. I think there are a lot of people unhappy with the modding by this moderator in the Soccer forum. I wasn't aware of the stuff that has went on here over the last few weeks. Its obviously been looked at given the large volume of unhappy customers who have been here before me.

    I agree with something from the other thread said by Savman which was that you did not grow up in a soccer mad country and as a result you don't understand a lot of the sniping that goes back and forth between rival sets of fans, most notbaly Man U. and Liverpool as they have the biggest followings.


    Finally on the thread that I was unhappy that was left open, all the following occurred.

    The first ten replies.

    [html]Hardly worthy of a thread of its own? [/html]
    Oh dear.
    I thought KUYT was playing well this season?
    there is already a liverpool thread.

    now to your post:

    1. you obviously know nothing of the background regarding rafas contract demands
    2. forget Houllier did we? Dossena, Lucas and Kuyt are much better than 90% of the dross Houllier bought, just coz you were 12 at the time and dont remember it. Also at any time we can sell Lucas and Dossena both who are highly respected in Italy, and considering the gossip this morning it seems Juve have an eye on Kuyt.
    3. MON really? not to insult any villa fans coz he is a good coach but he is not better than Rafa Beitez and has never done anything to prove himself better.

    its liverpool fans like you that dont know how well the club is run due to Rafa alone and how much damage it would do to us if he left, that are gonna end up pushing him out.

    there should be an exam about footballing knowledge before you are given access to Soccer...

    EDIT: as great a coach Mourinho is, it says a lot about you that you would consider him as a future manager consider the crap he has said about liverpool before and the way he acts is not becoming of a liverpool manager tbh. suppose you read The Sun too?
    do people ever get tired of harping on about Benitez and Liverpool on this forum?
    What does 100 percent control of the transfer budget mean?

    He doesn't have to discuss the transfers with members of the board?

    I don't think any manager has 100% control, all transfers have to sanctioned and justified tbh.
    623 posts, I hope they all weren't has **** as what you've written in this thread
    The above got a warning, it had a couple of thumbs up, did they get warned or banned?
    The problem with Rafa Benitez........is idiotic threads like this!!!rolleyes.gif
    The above received no warning.
    No wonder we Liverpool fans get a bad rep

    Some more questions


    Why is it that other similar Benitez threads did not last long?
    Why did one fail picture not got a yellow card?
    When did :rolleyes: on its own become a genuine, on topic reply which does not deserve a warning?
    When did lmfao become a proper reason to quote a person?
    'Stop talking shít' as a reply does not warrant a warning either, but 'good to see you crawl out from under your bridge NTL' does?
    Another post from the thread 'Why are you guys feeding ntlbell?'
    And the unwarned fail picture gets quoted with the followong reply 'I wish there was a no thanks button so I could put it under all your posts this thread.'

    There are many requests for the thread to be locked over the first 80 posts in the thread. I think I've shown in that one thread that you treated some posters differently to others.

    There are a huge number of posts that don't contribute to the topic on top of the 'please lock' or some hint to lock the thread.

    But then again you left it open even with all the rubbish in it, but of course you went on to fire out yellow cards like confetti.
    If you understood the rivalry element, you would understand that a thread like this is just going to cause trouble, end up with warnings etc and have the good sense to leave it locked. But then again you didn't grow up in a soccer mad country and maybe as a result you just don't understand that.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    I put this one separately as this concerns all the mods on our forum including you.

    But please explain how these two threads are allowed run when its clear that there are threads to put them in rather than start new threads.


    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055466575
    My trip to OT to see Utd vs Everton....Or not
    WEll just thought id share my dilemma at the moment. Im meant to be going to see Utd play Everton in two weeks , but its all hanging in the balance now because of the fa cup , if Utd draw against Spurs the match gets changed to two day before but flights etc is all booked flying out the Sunday (match is on the monday night , if replays occur match gets put back to the 31st January, same goes if Pool draw with Everton... I get the feeling we can beat Spurs at home , but just think that Pool are going to fcuk up my trip and i be stuck going to no match ! It will be just my luck for that to happen and knowing pool it wouldnt surprise me if it happens.

    Would you get your hopes up if you were me frown.gif
    and this one
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055470204
    Torres + cheese = This advert
    Well I must say this advert is legendary. Don't know when or why he did this but Torres did an advert for some small scale hairdressers. It's so bad it's cool.
    when there was already this one on first page of the forum which is below
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055464396
    Thread title on this one is:
    Dodgy Adds with Footballers


  • #13
    GuanYin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,552 ✭✭✭✭GuanYin


    eagle eye wrote: »
    I was looking for the Pigman post, the one that got the thumbs up from so many people who got banned. That whole thread seems to have dissapeared. I also remember the same Pigman being unfairly treated imo in a thread by Guan Yin some while back. I think it was Celtic/Rangers thread. Thats two off the top of my head.

    Well now. Firstly the "one that got the thuns up" was a post by Pighead and not Pigman (who hasn't been active since Oct 2007). Secondly Xavi6 was the one who dealt that ban, not me. I merely deleted the post as it was abusive. Thirdly, the thread is still very much visible in the soccer forum. Finally, I don't believe I have ever banned Pighead, I certainly have not infracted him and generally I infract with a ban.

    Are you just making up stuff?
    While the same poster was at the centre of both, the banning of posters for thanking that post was ludicrous imo. It was clear as had been posted shortly after the post by somebody else that the post was a parody on words from Saipan. If you didn't know this, the fact that it got so many thumbs up should have got your suspicion going that there was something a little unusual about it. If you had read down a couple of posts you would have got your answer. But then again you have rules and can use them when you wish.
    Feedback thread and helpdesk threads already exist for this.
    I remember GuanYin coming into another thread and warning Pigman to stay on topic. This is the other thread I'm talking about and he was posting more than anyone else and was at the butt end of being quoted and receiving silly, immature answers, he rightly responded in kind but he got warned but the others did not.
    Well it wasn't Pigman, it *might* have been Pighead but as you have already wrongly accused me of banning or infracting pighead with the public record shows I didn't AND you can't even get his name right, I think your testimony is dubious at best.

    Show me the link because it is obvious your recollection of the incident is very shady.

    I actually spent more time than I would normally do looking for these last night but to no avail.
    Probably because they don't exist.
    Anyways I've said my piece but of course as an ordinary poster in the soccer forum who says very little in feedback/help desk I wasn't aware that I had to present a case like a court case with evidence and all to have someone take a look at the modding.
    So you think you can just go and make up accusations and walk away? If you're going to present accusations, you need to back them up.

    All you've shown here is that you want to make up stuff and walk away from the responsiblity. Nothing you've claimed thus far has been accurate or true.

    My reasons for doing this are very clear in the op. I think there are a lot of people unhappy with the modding by this moderator in the Soccer forum. I wasn't aware of the stuff that has went on here over the last few weeks. Its obviously been looked at given the large volume of unhappy customers who have been here before me.

    Which customers? Who is paying to get into soccer? Your reasons for making stuff up aren't really clear to anyone.

    You have not made one verifiable or true accusation.
    I agree with something from the other thread said by Savman which was that you did not grow up in a soccer mad country and as a result you don't understand a lot of the sniping that goes back and forth between rival sets of fans, most notbaly Man U. and Liverpool as they have the biggest followings.
    Right. Because you need to grow up in a certain country to understand rivalry?
    Finally on the thread that I was unhappy that was left open, all the following occurred.

    The first ten replies.

    The above got a warning, it had a couple of thumbs up, did they get warned or banned?

    The above received no warning.
    The process has already been explained to you above.
    Some more questions


    Why is it that other similar Benitez threads did not last long?
    Which ones?
    Why did one fail picture not got a yellow card?
    I believe it is because the users had already been banned at that stage. There is a stage when the moderator has made the point and no further sanction is required.
    When did :rolleyes: on its own become a genuine, on topic reply which does not deserve a warning?
    Your question is loaded. It may never have been a genuine reply, but it can't actually be off topic and the circumstances dictate whether it receives a warning.
    When did lmfao become a proper reason to quote a person?
    Wednesday the 12th of March, 2004
    'Stop talking shít' as a reply does not warrant a warning either, but 'good to see you crawl out from under your bridge NTL' does?
    Another post from the thread 'Why are you guys feeding ntlbell?'
    And the unwarned fail picture gets quoted with the followong reply 'I wish there was a no thanks button so I could put it under all your posts this thread.'
    Again the process has been explained.
    There are many requests for the thread to be locked over the first 80 posts in the thread. I think I've shown in that one thread that you treated some posters differently to others.
    You're having trouble with simple concepts. We'll try one last time. Two (count them) two moderators examined the posts together and picked the offending posts. Not me, not any one person. Two. And the posts sanctioned were the ones that the TWO (in case you forgot) mods agreed on.

    As for the "requests". I don't believe any post has a right to request a thread be locked unless they started it. Even then the "rights" are dubious.
    There are a huge number of posts that don't contribute to the topic on top of the 'please lock' or some hint to lock the thread.

    But then again you left it open even with all the rubbish in it, but of course you went on to fire out yellow cards like confetti.

    If I'd deleted the posts you've have accused me of covering it up. I left the yellows there to show that those posts were sanctioned. I also issued an on thread warning after which the thread became "stable" and "rubbish"-free.
    If you understood the rivalry element, you would understand that a thread like this is just going to cause trouble, end up with warnings etc and have the good sense to leave it locked. But then again you didn't grow up in a soccer mad country and maybe as a result you just don't understand that.
    Oddly, once I warned everyone the thread has been no problem.

    The problem occured before I got to it.

    So your logic is faulty. You're suggesting that the events that occured before I got to the thread are reason for me to close to the thread even though there has been no such problems with the thread since I got to it.

    Hrmm....

    Can you show me how the thread has been trouble after my in-thread warning?


  • #14
    GuanYin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,552 ✭✭✭✭GuanYin


    eagle eye wrote: »
    I put this one separately as this concerns all the mods on our forum including you.

    Well I can't answer something for the other mods and they probably can't address a thread directed at me in feedback.

    Why have you put stuff concerning them in a thread that is directed at me?

    Can you explain why you have no create a separate thread for this separate topic?


  • #15
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Some of your answers regarding the questions I asked on specific issues(I'll edit my post to include numbers on these to make it easy for you to understand the ones I mean) are very vague and unclear.
    Its quite clear that you are far more experienced than me at arguing your case in this forum. When its all said and done I don't believe you will accept that you have made any mistakes anywhere even though I am quite certain that I've shown mistakes by you in the Benitez thread. I also wasn't aware that I had to put the other post in a separate thread. Butthe idea behind that is the old divide and conquer theory I presume, and the fact that it does concern your moderation(as well as others) makes me think it should be here, but I digress.

    Here are the questions I asked and I numbered them this time. Your responses to all are vague. I'd appreciate if you would address them again individually and with clarity so that I may understand your replies. I'm going to change some of the questions slightly so as to add more clarity in the question.

    1.Why is it that other similar Benitez threads did not last long?
    2.Why did one fail picture not got a yellow card?
    3.Is this symbol on its won :rolleyes: within the rules as a reply?
    4.Is 'lmfao' considered an on topic and viable answer to post or is it against the rules.
    5. Is 'Stop talking shít' as a reply allowed under the rules. Is it better to post 'stop talking shít' than to post 'good to see you crawl out from under your bridge NTL' does?
    6.Is this post on topic and ok? 'Why are you guys feeding ntlbell?'
    7.And the unwarned fail picture gets quoted with the followong reply 'I wish there was a no thanks button so I could put it under all your posts this thread.' Is that a fair and within the rules reply?

    Here is another Benitez thread that lasted five hours.
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055446958

    On the thread you reopened, after you reopened it, all these posts were made.
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=58715031&postcount=122
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=58719934&postcount=149
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=58720807&postcount=155
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=58726640&postcount=158
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=58728356&postcount=167
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=58730121&postcount=170
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=58730306&postcount=172
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=58730351&postcount=174
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=58730429&postcount=176

    and a mod from another forum with the same viewpoint as yours truly.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=58735667&postcount=190

    As I said I'd number the questions from that thread. You grouped a couple together and state 'again the process has been explained'. This does not explain why certain posters were treated differently. The fact that some posts have yellow cards while others do not have is clearly showing a difference. You just go off and say that some poster had been banned previously, how could he post if he was banned previously?



    Also you jump on my back when I say customers, an unfortunate choice of words as it gives th argumentative person an opportunity to point out a minor error of no consequence to the whole point I was making, much like the comment about my not being a mod, which was also pointless and possible an attempt at ball busting maybe, although I just thought it rather childish myself, as I do the 'customer' comment, but I digress again.


  • #16
    GuanYin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,552 ✭✭✭✭GuanYin


    Hold on. You've leveled alot of accusations against me which you have yet to prove.

    You either prove or retract and apologize for those and THEN I'll deal with the next batch.

    I'm not going to waste my time going through every single point you make only to knock them down, you to ignore the fact you've made false accusations and try hide it by making some more. Not that I can't. I'll happily deal with any and all accusations made.

    BUT fair is fair, you've not addressed a single counter point bar to try hide your mistakes with outright lies.

    As for the links? I'll review and moderate them as I see fit. Thank you for bringing them to my attention though. Next time, I suggest the report post.

    When you deal with your original accusations, I'll come back.


  • #17
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    GuanYin wrote: »
    Hold on. You've leveled alot of accusations against me which you have yet to prove.

    You either prove or retract and apologize for those and THEN I'll deal with the next batch.

    I'm not going to waste my time going through every single point you make only to knock them down, you to ignore the fact you've made false accusations and try hide it by making some more. Not that I can't. I'll happily deal with any and all accusations made.

    BUT fair is fair, you've not addressed a single counter point bar to try hide your mistakes with outright lies.

    As for the links? I'll review and moderate them as I see fit. Thank you for bringing them to my attention though. Next time, I suggest the report post.

    When you deal with your original accusations, I'll come back.
    Specifically what accusations that I have not addressed.

    What lies?


  • #18
    GuanYin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,552 ✭✭✭✭GuanYin


    One of those posts was worthy of sanction and that was the one bt the poster who agreed with you (by the way, the fact he is a mod of somewhere means nothing in soccer).

    Let me see....
    You claimed that:
    I victimize users.
    I banned Pigman/Pighead unfairly and previously banned him unfairly.
    I delete posts where I moderate unfairly.
    I would ban users who started threads about Alex Feguson.

    Among other things.

    You don't even seem to have a point of accusation, you're just making up lies and as I discredit each one you're making up another.

    So yeah. When you retract and apologize, I'll consider further communication.

    Smods, if you think this is an unfair stance by me, please let me know.


  • #19
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    GuanYin wrote: »
    One of those posts was worthy of sanction and that was the one bt the poster who agreed with you (by the way, the fact he is a mod of somewhere means nothing in soccer).
    And of course you expect me to go off on a tangent because you don't seem of have issued a yellow card in this instance either.
    I victimize users.
    I never used this word, you used this word in response to my statement that I would be worried that I might receive special attention due to my receiving a yellow card from you.
    I banned Pigman/Pighead unfairly and previously banned him unfairly.
    I never said you banned either party, I just remember a thread where he got warned, unfairly imo due to the replies he was receiving, before I post this I will do my best to find this thread.
    I delete posts where I moderate unfairly.
    I said that I presumed posts had been deleted, I did not say that you delete posts. Please read it carefully again. I was in no way saying that this was a purposeful act to cover tracks, I was merely saying that it seems that posts have been deleted, I don't know if they are deleted or not. Interestingly while browsing around though the sys area of boards, which I don't do ever, I noticed that a post of the day had been deleted and there was a thread about it, so it does happen.
    I would ban users who started threads about Alex Feguson.
    I said imo, that is what I understood from your comments, I explained that to you already. I said that I thought it was not well explained, unlike the amount of typing you did to justify reopening the Benitez thread and warning people.
    You don't even seem to have a point of accusation, you're just making up lies and as I discredit each one you're making up another.
    I said that it appears to me that you do not moderate fairly across the forum. Again where are the lies, you have not shown anywhere that I have told a lie, and quite frankly I dislike your accusations that I am a liar. I said there are a lot of unhappy bunnies in the soccer forum due to your moderation. A lot of people feel its over the top.
    So yeah. When you retract and apologize, I'll consider further communication.
    I don't believe I've lied anywhere, and I don't have any idea what I need to retract. I am simply here to discuss your moderation of the soccer forum.

    I found out last night that this forum only allows comments from moderators and the op.
    Is there any way we can let the other soccer members voice their opinions on this matter? Or is this a case of divide and conquer also?

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055427838&highlight=celtic+rangers

    Above is the thread where Pigman gave a few smart retorts to a childish comment which had no business being in a post. You came on and warned him for not contributing.

    'Pigman II, if you aren't going to participate in discussion and debate and still want to post controversial opinions, I'm going to view you as trolling and ban you.

    I'll check back here soon.'
    Pigman had contributed to the thread.

    Theres a problem with moderation here imo. I personally believe that you needed to add to this comment and tell the other poster that his aunty being his uncle had no place in this thread either, and that there is to be no more of this from either party.

    That was one of two comments which were just an effort at oneupmanship by another poster in that thread. Oneupmanship is a very common theme in this country in particular and when two parties get involved they should both be warned about it or both left to battle on.

    What you did was gave the win to one party by telling the other that he cannot continue. I don't know if you did anything after he replied to your warning, but he was just trying to make you understand why he had made the comments he did. I fully understand his annoyance at the other poster, however childish it might be, but its understandable that people get annoyed from time to time. Its also understandable that a poster would feel unfairly treated in this instance with no comments by the moderator to the other party involved. Just because some people are more adept at flouting the rules than others, i.e. stay on topic while putting in a silly comment, does not justify the comment, and does not justify a moderator giving them a free pass in the above instance.

    So thats the Pigman I was talking about.

    Now could you please answer the numerical questions seperartely and clearly so that I might understand why the moderation was different in each case?


  • #20
    Gordon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,522 ✭✭✭✭Gordon


    I believe I can clear this all up.
    eagle eye wrote: »
    I just seen the locked thread here and I understand clearly why it went nowhere. BUT,

    I spend most of my time on three forums and two of those have been full of unhappy bunnies over the moderation in the soccer forum of the same person who is mentioned in the other locked thread which is on the first page of this forum. For that reason I started this thread.

    I received a warning today for putting a fail picture in a thread that I and most sensible users expected to be locked very quickly. It was locked but not as quickly as was expected. My picture also contained something which might actually support the thread title, as I have not been a fan of the subject of the thread for some time. I'm not worried about the warning I received as I don't normally mess around enough to be warned/infracted/banned. However I might now be on the radar of this moderator and that could cause me problems in the future.
    Don't worry, GuanYin will adjudicate based on current activity, the sentence will alter due to your past, but the adjudication will be dealt on a case by case basis. So it won't cause you problems in the future, unless of course you cause problems in the future.
    As said in the other thread it does seem that this person seems on certain days to be just ready to hand out the warnings, bans etc. and it does not seem to be carried out in a consistent manner either. I think its time that whoever decides on Moderators to have a serious look at the moderation by this moderator. I know two people got some form of infraction/ban for giving the thumbs up to a post. Is this normal?

    Yes, can be very normal.


  • #21
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Gordon wrote: »
    I believe I can clear this all up.
    I was asked to give examples and I numbered them. These show inconsistency imo. I've asked for clear and descriptive answers to why they were treated differently in the same thread to others including a fail picture, which is what I received a yellow card for.

    I've also at this stage been told I'm a liar.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    Gordon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,522 ✭✭✭✭Gordon


    Is this about something that was said after post #1? I haven't been able to keep track of this thread after that post, there has been a great deal of unsubstantiated, unlinked, ambiguous statements and questions.

    How about we start from the beginning and we can clarify everything by clearly and concisely explaining everything with clarity.

    So what's up?


  • #23
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    It seems to me that this person seems on certain days to be just ready to hand out the warnings, bans etc. and it does not seem to be carried out in a consistent manner either.

    Personally I was involved in a thread which I believed should not have been a thread in the first place, but been part of the Liverpool superthread. I posted a fail picture, I've explained that it was a two pronged joke. That being that I have personally aired my dismay with the manager of the team that was in question in other threads in the past. However I also felt that this thread was just a set up to get one of the infamous Man Utd. vs Liverpool rows going. So I put up a fail picture which had a line in it which reads 'I find your lack of win disturbing', which was a reference to all of Liverpools and this mangers recent draws. As I said a joke.

    Now I received a yellow card for this post. No problem there, and so did many others but one person who posted a fail picture did not receive similar treatment.

    There were also yellow cards handed out for other posts that did not include fail pictures but then on the other hand there were posts that did not receive any warning/infraction/ban and in some of these cases it seemed to me that they were breaking the rules and in a more serious manner also.

    Basically at the end of it all, I feel that the moderator has failed to do the job in a fair manner across the soccer forum. I feel the moderator lacks the basic understanding of what soccer fans in this country are like. I feel the moderator is too gung ho on occasion with the handing out of warnings/bans etc. I feel the moderator lacks understanding of the Irish sense of humour and takes things seriously at times when they are in fact a joke.


  • #24
    Gordon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,522 ✭✭✭✭Gordon


    eagle eye wrote: »
    It seems to me that this person seems on certain days to be just ready to hand out the warnings, bans etc.
    Which days?
    and it does not seem to be carried out in a consistent manner either.

    Personally I was involved in a thread which I believed should not have been a thread in the first place, but been part of the Liverpool superthread. I posted a fail picture, I've explained that it was a two pronged joke. That being that I have personally aired my dismay with the manager of the team that was in question in other threads in the past. However I also felt that this thread was just a set up to get one of the infamous Man Utd. vs Liverpool rows going. So I put up a fail picture which had a line in it which reads 'I find your lack of win disturbing', which was a reference to all of Liverpools and this mangers recent draws. As I said a joke.

    Now I received a yellow card for this post. No problem there, and so did many others but one person who posted a fail picture did not receive similar treatment.
    The person that posted that pic received a harsher treatment, a ban. They got this for something prior to that as far as I understand. Therefore, no need to further infract for a more minor offence.
    There were also yellow cards handed out for other posts that did not include fail pictures but then on the other hand there were posts that did not receive any warning/infraction/ban and in some of these cases it seemed to me that they were breaking the rules and in a more serious manner also.
    Please link these offending more serious posts.
    Basically at the end of it all, I feel that the moderator has failed to do the job in a fair manner across the soccer forum. I feel the moderator lacks the basic understanding of what soccer fans in this country are like. I feel the moderator is too gung ho on occasion with the handing out of warnings/bans etc. I feel the moderator lacks understanding of the Irish sense of humour and takes things seriously at times when they are in fact a joke.
    The answer to this is that the forum was closed in the past due to excessive muppetry and e-violence. This is important that the mods on that forum should be serious and make sure everyone abides by the rules that are set out. Maybe you weren't around when the old version of soccer existed, but it was a complete mess and problematic.

    Hope that helps.


  • #25
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Gordon wrote: »
    Which days?
    No particular day. Just some days. And a lot of people feel that this moderator has been ott, I keep reading about it, in other forums and from the looks of this forum its been plentiful here also.
    Gordon wrote: »
    The person that posted that pic received a harsher treatment, a ban. They got this for something prior to that as far as I understand. Therefore, no need to further infract for a more minor offence.

    So, lets clarify, somebody was banned prior to that post and still managed to post in the thread?
    FYI, this person has been posting regularly since that thread began. So no ban has come into affect. And if this has been overlooked then it again shows inconsistency in the perfomance of this moderator.
    Gordon wrote: »
    Please link these offending more serious posts.

    Here is the thread, I've spent a lot of time linking things hoping to receive a proper response here but to no avail. So I'll link the thread and you can peruse through it and see the amount of annoyance it caused and the swell of ridiculous posts that have been made in it and the way yellow cards were thrown around like confetti.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055468715
    Gordon wrote: »
    The answer to this is that the forum was closed in the past due to excessive muppetry and e-violence. This is important that the mods on that forum should be serious and make sure everyone abides by the rules that are set out. Maybe you weren't around when the old version of soccer existed, but it was a complete mess and problematic.

    No I wasn't a member at that time, but there is a huge difference in the moderation of this person and others in the forum imo. I believe that a more pleasant approach to modding and being in touch with the situation are important factors in performing the tasks of a moderator. I think they are lacking in this instance.


  • #26
    sceptre
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    eagle eye wrote: »
    Here is the thread, I've spent a lot of time linking things hoping to receive a proper response here but to no avail. So I'll link the thread and you can peruse through it and see the amount of annoyance it caused and the swell of ridiculous posts that have been made in it and the way yellow cards were thrown around like confetti.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055468715
    I'd be impressed if Gordon has time to go through that thread and ferret out the posts that might be the ones you're referring to, it being 180 posts long. In the absence of specific links, I won't have time to go through a thread of that length till Wednesday at the earliest.


  • #27
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    sceptre wrote: »
    I'd be impressed if Gordon has time to go through that thread and ferret out the posts that might be the ones you're referring to, it being 180 posts long. In the absence of specific links, I won't have time to go through a thread of that length till Wednesday at the earliest.
    Well he doesn't really have to go through it and read every post. All he has to do is scan quickly through the first two pages/80 posts to see what I'm talking about. At that stage imo he will understand what I'm talking about and might want to take a closer look. I'm not in any rush for replies anyways, so take all the time you want.


  • #28
    GuanYin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,552 ✭✭✭✭GuanYin


    eagle eye wrote: »
    but there is a huge difference in the moderation of this person and others in the forum imo.

    SMODS, on this issue:

    As has been explicitly stated, in the case of the incident referred, two moderators reviewed the thread and the ones I infracted were the ones we BOTH agreed on.

    In fact, very, very few soccer forum moderating decisions occur without discussion either before or after the fact.

    If a soccer mod acts, it is usually with the consensus of the rest of us so it is almost impossible to pick any one soccer mod out and say they are stricted than the others.

    I can allow any smod access to threads or PMs discussing soccer modding to show that usually discussion takes place before actions and specifically in this case if they so wish :) They times stamps will show that the action taken, was not a solo act.


  • #29
    Gordon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,522 ✭✭✭✭Gordon


    A quick glance only gives me this fail image that was not actioned. I would imagine that the soccer mods didn't action this because there was some form of discussion and relevance as there was actually a post attached to the image.

    Why do you presume that it is only GuanYin making the decisions that you don't agree with?


  • #30
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Gordon wrote: »
    A quick glance only gives me this fail image that was not actioned. I would imagine that the soccer mods didn't action this because there was some form of discussion and relevance as there was actually a post attached to the image.

    Why do you presume that it is only GuanYin making the decisions that you don't agree with?
    I would have thought that the moderator who posted in the thread and reopened it and gave me a yellow card also acted in all other instances before that post.

    The reason given in this thread for no action being taken in that instance is that the same poster was banned previous which is untrue. So now we go to the fact that there was a reply in this post. Both the quote and the reply in that post were both nothing to do with the topic of the thread. So basically the words typed out in that post were taking it further off topic, and a fail picture was added also.

    These are the questions I asked earlier. These are all regarding postings the Benitez thread.

    1.Why is it that other similar Benitez threads did not last long?
    2.Why did one fail picture not got a yellow card?
    3.Is this symbol on its won :rolleyes: within the rules as a reply?
    4.Is 'lmfao' considered an on topic and viable answer to post or is it against the rules.
    5. Is 'Stop talking shít' as a reply allowed under the rules. Is it better to post 'stop talking shít' than to post 'good to see you crawl out from under your bridge NTL' does?
    6.Is this post on topic and ok? 'Why are you guys feeding ntlbell?'
    7.And the unwarned fail picture gets quoted with the followong reply 'I wish there was a no thanks button so I could put it under all your posts this thread.' Is that a fair and within the rules reply?


    Regarding 1, here is another Benitez that lasted 5 hours
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055446958

    We've discussed 2 above.

    3 for me is trolling or attempt to agitate by posting just that symbol. The poster who was quoted replied asking for explanation for this post.

    4 is a post that was concerning posts of mine. I got a laugh out it and took it in the vein it was meant.

    5 is concerning another post with the use of í to get around the swear filter.

    6 is telling people not to mind the poster as he is trolling. I fully understand the annoyance the person that posted this felt.

    7 is a reply to the fail picture that pretty much states how annoying this post as well as his other posts in the thread made a person feel.

    But basically you have in seven or eight replies, back seat modding, a swear filter violation, off topic replies. Two people making comments about the poster ntlbell(one of which received a yellow card, the other did not), and a poster unhappy with the fail picure that did not receive a warning who is basically telling off said fail picture poster.

    There are numerous posts calling for the thread to be locked which received no warning of any sort.
    There are numerous off topic replies not including the requests to lock the thread up which did not receive warnings.

    Towards the end of the thread, a poster(mod from another forum as it happens) questions the fact that this thread was allowed on the forum, and seems to have the same understanding as me regarding the superthreads where the op should have posted imo. After the discussion began here and I highlighted this matter, the moderator in question went back to the thread and had a go at this poster, without the use of the yellow card system.
    This again shows that people are being treated differently. This is back seast modding, if I had done this I am certain I would have faced the full force of the powers available to this moderator.

    If you read this thread you can see the difference in this moderators tone at different times. I have been accused of being a liar in this thread by this moderator.
    You can see that some replies in this thread are done with great clarity, while others have no clarity at all from this same moderator.
    This moderator jumps to conclusions regarding statements I have made.

    For instance I said: Well I've been looking for a number of posts by going back through your posts but none of them are there. I don't understand why not unless of course they have been deleted.
    Guan Yin said: This is the most disgracefully dishonest and disingenious thing I have EVER seen posted on boards. Basicially you make an accusation, can't or won't back it up, so instead accuse me of hiding all the posts.

    I never said that anywhere. /

    I said that the Benitez thread should be in the Liverpool superthread.

    Guan Yin says and I quote: So "team talk", gossip and rumors. The Benitez thread was none of those.

    The op said that he was a Liverpool fan and that he was unhappy with the Manager. /

    Guan Yin says the following and I quote: Ohh ok, so what you'e saying is, you're happy to make an accusation but not willing to back it up with..ermm facts.

    I respond with the questions above but received inconclusive and incorrect answers, including the following regarding the poster who was not yellow carded for the fail picture.

    I believe it is because the users had already been banned at that stage. There is a stage when the moderator has made the point and no further sanction is required. /

    Guan Yin said: Well it wasn't Pigman, it *might* have been Pighead but as you have already wrongly accused me of banning or infracting pighead with the public record shows I didn't AND you can't even get his name right, I think your testimony is dubious at best.

    Show me the link because it is obvious your recollection of the incident is very shady.


    I respond with this link and explain what I thought was unfair in that about the warning: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055427838&highlight=celtic+rangers

    We've also seen Guan Yin nit pick here on a number of occasions with imo chidish/immature comments.


    Guan Yin said:

    4. Your opinion of what passes for good moderation and ours obviously differ. The important aspect of this is, that you are not a moderator of the soccer forum.

    Which customers? Who is paying to get into soccer? Your reasons for making stuff up aren't really clear to anyone.

    The above comment was made because I had the misfortune to call forum members customers.


    I'm not happy with the way this moderator has treated me in this thread by the way, I don't like being called a liar.

    I further believe that the way this moderator jumps to conclusions, and picks up on little things like the my word customers, or throws the you're not a moderator line at me shows irrational behaviour not suitable for someone modding the soccer forum where childish/immature comments are a regular thing.

    I believe that I have acted rationally and fairly in this thread.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    I just wanted to add this. I mixed up the names of Pigman and Pighead. I don't really have reason to know one from the other or did not until now.

    Anyhow, the reason I post about this is the moderator accusing me of saying that she banned pighead. I never said that either, whether this is not reading my post properly or just jumping to conclusions, well its just yet another case of my being told by this moderator that I said something I did not. In brackets I will add in the error I made regarding two different posters.

    Here is what I said.


    I was looking for the Pigman(should have been Pighead) post, the one that got the thumbs up from so many people who got banned. That whole thread seems to have dissapeared. I also remember the same Pigman(this was Pigman) being unfairly treated imo in a thread by Guan Yin some while back. I think it was Celtic/Rangers thread. Thats two off the top of my head.

    While the same poster was at the centre of both( this is incorrect it was Pighead in one and Pigman in the other), the banning of posters for thanking that post was ludicrous imo. It was clear as had been posted shortly after the post by somebody else that the post was a parody on words from Saipan. If you didn't know this, the fact that it got so many thumbs up should have got your suspicion going that there was something a little unusual about it. If you had read down a couple of posts you would have got your answer.



    I never stated anywhere in my words above that Guan Yin banned Pighead.

    But Guan Yin stated I did in this thread.


  • #32
    Gordon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,522 ✭✭✭✭Gordon


    I can't follow this, you are posting so erratically with negligible links to back up anything and jumping from point to point.


  • #33
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Gordon wrote: »
    I can't follow this, you are posting so erratically with negligible links to back up anything and jumping from point to point.
    Ok, I'll go through it all again, I'll put each point in a separate post if thats suitable for you and put links for each one. And thats for the Benitez thread only.

    After that I'll show you the other stuff I consider unfair moderating in another post. I'll attach relevant links here again.

    And then when we have finished with that I'll go through the accusations that have been levelled at me in this thread in yet another post. And I'll link the posts that they are in and also quote the stuff I'm talking about.

    It will take some time.

    I'll come back soon and check on this to see if that will suit you.


  • #34
    Gordon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,522 ✭✭✭✭Gordon


    Why don't we just try and address the first point that we have discussed re: fail pic.

    this post was not infracted (I understand) because the quoted post in that post seemed to have some merit for discussion. Hence the quoted post was not infracted. And since there was some form of discussion the fail post, as a whole, was not infracted. That's how I see it. Maybe a soccer mod could clarify.


  • #35
    GuanYin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,552 ✭✭✭✭GuanYin


    Gordon wrote: »
    Why don't we just try and address the first point that we have discussed re: fail pic.

    this post was not infracted (I understand) because the quoted post in that post seemed to have some merit for discussion. Hence the quoted post was not infracted. And since there was some form of discussion the fail post, as a whole, was not infracted. That's how I see it. Maybe a soccer mod could clarify.

    That was my view. Xavi6 did not highlight the post when we reviewed the thread together either, I am not sure what his reasoning was, but I guess it was most likely the same reason.


  • #36
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    In Post no. 11 on this thread I asked
    eagle eye wrote: »
    Why did one fail picture not got a yellow card?
    In post no. 13 on this thread Guan Yin replied after quoting the above question with this.
    GuanYin wrote: »
    I believe it is because the users had already been banned at that stage. There is a stage when the moderator has made the point and no further sanction is required.
    To the same question, Gordon responded in post no. 24 on this thread with the following answer.
    Gordon wrote: »
    The person that posted that pic received a harsher treatment, a ban. They got this for something prior to that as far as I understand. Therefore, no need to further infract for a more minor offence.

    Since then I have checked to see was this user banned, and I brought it to your attention that this was not the case.
    You now both admit that he did not receive any warning/infraction/ban but only after I went to great lengths to prove your previous replies were incorrect.
    Is Guan Yin now admitting to making an error here or, did she lie to me originally hoping I'd be dumb enough not to check up on it?

    Here is your latest line.
    Gordon wrote: »
    Why don't we just try and address the first point that we have discussed re: fail pic.

    this post was not infracted (I understand) because the quoted post in that post seemed to have some merit for discussion. Hence the quoted post was not infracted. And since there was some form of discussion the fail post, as a whole, was not infracted. That's how I see it. Maybe a soccer mod could clarify.
    GuanYin wrote: »
    That was my view. Xavi6 did not highlight the post when we reviewed the thread together either, I am not sure what his reasoning was, but I guess it was most likely the same reason.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    GuanYin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,552 ✭✭✭✭GuanYin


    yup that was my mistake. There was one post we didn't sanction because the post was banned after the second offense. I thought that was the one you referred to, we did alot of posts in that thread.

    In any case, as a rule, we don't talk about other peoples bans. We will only discuss the offense and sanction with the offender/sanctioned so you're not going to get an answer from us on those.


  • #38
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    GuanYin wrote: »
    yup that was my mistake. There was one post we didn't sanction because the post was banned after the second offense. I thought that was the one you referred to, we did alot of posts in that thread.

    In any case, as a rule, we don't talk about other peoples bans. We will only discuss the offense and sanction with the offender/sanctioned so you're not going to get an answer from us on those.
    Thats not a good enough reply at this stage, but I'll wait for Gordon to come back.


  • #39
    Xavi6
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,977 ✭✭✭✭Xavi6


    There are faaaaar too many tangeants in this thread for me to sift through and deal with but I will try and give a decent answer to the initial question - why was the Benitez thread left open?

    Now I didn't actually see the thread until 10 hours after it had started as I was asleep. When I did see it however it had progressed into something of a car crash. So from my point of view -

    1. IMO the thread should never have been a stand alone thread in the first place. However there were no mods around at the time to deal with it and merge it with the team threads. That's going to happen when people have lives. The CMod did exactly the right thing and intervened when there were no actual forum mods online. No one can have any complaints about that action.

    2. After the initial idiocies there was some genuine discussion in the thread. Because of this, a merge of a thread of 100 posts with a thread of thousands would be a disaster as every sense of structure would be lost due to the mixing of post times.

    3. When there were enough mods, i.e. more than one, online at the same time the decision was taken to punish those who had essentially acted the bollox and contributed nothing constructive to thread. We spent a good half hour or more listing the posts/posters that deserved a warning. If we missed something then I humbly apologise (on my behalf anyway).

    4. As far as I can remember nobody reported the OP to draw a mod's attention to it. Why not? 'Help us to help you' is something we keep trying to emphasise but it continues to fall on deaf ears.

    To sum it up, if I had seen the OP then I would have merged the threads straight away, or even locked it, before the village idiots (and I use that term in the context of that thread only) waded in with their tupence worth. I did exactly that with a thread started on Daniel Agger last night (I can provide links if you'd like).

    Mistakes are made by everybody, but in this case the thread's existence could not really be helped.

    Any other issues you have with the modding of the forum are your own and I won't comment on them in this thread unless I'm directly asked to do so.


  • #40
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    To Xavi,

    I am dissapointed to see you post in this thread. I am the only forum member allowed post here, and now we have two moderators from the soccer forum posting in this thead. I understand you spent a lot of time on your post here but its far too late for you to come in and try and explain this away.

    Do you sleep at all Xavi?

    You posted on the 22nd of January at 07.07. Your next posted on the 22nd of January was at 23.34.

    I have to say that I find it surprising that you came online to discuss this matter at sometime before 15.34 when Guan Yin posted in the thread.

    I find it even more surprising that you would not have any thoughts on the matter that you would like to share with the rest of us in that thread or in any other thread in the soccer forum when you came online at sometime before 15.34 or 2.34 am in another part of the world.

    I've noticed a huge swing in the attitude and explanations given by Guan Yin in this thread.

    I think you can understand my unwillingness to accept your reply as completely credible at this stage.

    I do want to add that I admire the way you have moderated in the short time you have been a mod in the soccer forum.

    My own personal belief is that you would have come on if you had been involved in moderating that thread and told everyone to calm down and made it clear that there was to be no posting of fail pics or other stuff. I would not have expected that there would be the spraying like confetti of yellow cards in the thread if you were involved. The reason I'd imagine things would go differently is because you have been moderating with a commen sense approach and not with the same gung ho approach of Guan Yin.

    Sorry if I have come across a bit strong here, but you can understand that if you had replied to this matter a lot earlier then I might accept a lot of what you say.

    If anybody thought that because I have made it clear that I respect Xavi as a moderator meant that one reply from him at this late stage would alter my belief that Guan Yin is not moderating in a fair manner across the soccer forum, well you are seriously mistaken.

    I have a lot more to say on this matter.


  • #41
    Xavi6
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,977 ✭✭✭✭Xavi6


    eagle eye wrote: »
    To Xavi,

    I am dissapointed to see you post in this thread. I am the only forum member allowed post here, and now we have two moderators from the soccer forum posting in this thead. I understand you spent a lot of time on your post here but its far too late for you to come in and try and explain this away.

    That's not what I'm doing. I said I was answering one of your questions in the hope of clearing it up.
    Do you sleep at all Xavi?

    You posted on the 22nd of January at 07.07. Your next posted on the 22nd of January was at 23.34.

    Emmmm yes I do sleep, usually between the hours of 2pm and 11pm Irish time (which is why I didn't see the thread in question btw). Believe it or not on that day I may have had training or something similar, hence the gap in my posts that you highlight above.

    I'm not sure what point you're making with that.
    I have to say that I find it surprising that you came online to discuss this matter at sometime before 15.34 when Guan Yin posted in the thread.

    I didn't, and never said I did. I spoke about it at midnight when I came online.
    I find it even more surprising that you would not have any thoughts on the matter that you would like to share with the rest of us in that thread or in any other thread in the soccer forum when you came online at sometime before 15.34 or 2.34 am in another part of the world.

    I wasn't online at any time then. As I said, I spoke about it when I DID come on around midnight.

    I hope that's clear.
    I've noticed a huge swing in the attitude and explanations given by Guan Yin in this thread.

    I think you can understand my unwillingness to accept your reply as completely credible at this stage.

    It's perfectly credible in relation to that specific question. Choosing to accept it or not though is up to you.
    I do want to add that I admire the way you have moderated in the short time you have been a mod in the soccer forum.

    Thank you
    My own personal belief is that you would have come on if you had been involved in moderating that thread and told everyone to calm down and made it clear that there was to be no posting of fail pics or other stuff. I would not have expected that there would be the spraying like confetti of yellow cards in the thread if you were involved. The reason I'd imagine things would go differently is because you have been moderating with a commen sense approach and not with the same gung ho approach of Guan Yin.

    Again that's an issue with another mod and not me so it'd be unfair to comment.
    Sorry if I have come across a bit strong here, but you can understand that if you had replied to this matter a lot earlier then I might accept a lot of what you say.

    I didn't have the capability. Access to this forum was only granted to me yesterday.
    If anybody thought that because I have made it clear that I respect Xavi as a moderator meant that one reply from him at this late stage would alter my belief that Guan Yin is not moderating in a fair manner across the soccer forum, well you are seriously mistaken.

    Nobody thought that. I took it upon myself to offer you a respnse. If that was wasted then I'll know for the future.
    I have a lot more to say on this matter.

    I don't doubt that, but I'm struggling to think of what outcome you would like from all this. Heads rolling?


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    GuanYin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,552 ✭✭✭✭GuanYin


    That is a very good point.

    What outcome do you expect or want from this?

    What do you hope to achieve here?

    You appear to expect some sort of outcome that you are arguing towards, but I can't really make out what it is.


  • #43
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    There is no need for heads to roll.

    What I would like to come from this discussion is the following.

    1. A fair and frank discussion in the soccer forum of how people think the forum is being moderated and thoughts regarding the moderators. I just feel that Guan Yin has to back off a bit in certain areas. I think that a discussion in the forum where members are allowed to air their grievances might clear things up a little.
    If that happens and the moderators take heed of it, then we could see a lot less of these threads.
    In all fairness the amount of threads and issues that have been discussed here concerning the moderation of Guan Yin has to mean something. And the complaints I've read in this forum include a lot from posters who would be respected and not troublesome in the soccer forum.
    OR

    2. I'd like Guan Yin to accept that there might indeed be issues with her moderation that she needs to look at and address. I'd like Guan Yin to admit that she has at times in the past acted irrationally as a moderator in the soccer forum.

    I believe that 1 will lead to Guan Yin accepting 2, as I believe that a large majority of the soccer forum members feel as I do.

    On a personal level, I'd like an apology for being called a liar and being accused of saying things I did not. Below is an example.
    GuanYin wrote: »

    Let me see....
    You claimed that:
    I banned Pigman/Pighead unfairly and previously banned him unfairly.
    I delete posts where I moderate unfairly.

    Among other things.

    You don't even seem to have a point of accusation, you're just making up lies and as I discredit each one you're making up another.


  • #44
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    ^^^ Anyone care to respond?


  • #45
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Well posts 41 and 42 asked me a question. I responded and since then there has been no reply from anybody.

    I see that after this thread had ran for a while there were two moderators added to the soccer forum. I'm hoping this will not form any part of a reply to me here, if indeed I ever get a reply.

    Surely I'm entitled to at least an apology here for being called a liar.


  • #46
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    I see Guan Yin has posted in this forum regularly since I was last asked a queston here.

    Is there any chance of you posting in this thread again?


  • #47
    GuanYin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,552 ✭✭✭✭GuanYin


    I've explained anything that I'm going to explain to you.

    Until someone further up the chain tells me I've something to answer for, I don't see any point in engaging with you on these matters.

    But thank you for your feedback. :)


  • #48
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    GuanYin wrote: »
    I've explained anything that I'm going to explain to you.

    Until someone further up the chain tells me I've something to answer for, I don't see any point in engaging with you on these matters.

    But thank you for your feedback. :)

    Do you not feel, on a personal level, the need to retract and apologise for calling me a liar?

    You accused me of lying and demanded an apology, when I showed you I had not lied you backed off but have failed to admit any wrongdoing.

    You put a smiley in your post for the first time in this thread in the post quoted above.
    Did you just put the smiley in because you are happy, or does it mean something more?
    Is it something similar to the 'customer' and 'you're not a mod' comments?


  • #49
    GuanYin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,552 ✭✭✭✭GuanYin


    eagle eye wrote: »
    Do you not feel, on a personal level, the need to retract and apologise for calling me a liar?

    Nope.
    You accused me of lying and demanded an apology, when I showed you I had not lied you backed off but have failed to admit any wrongdoing.
    I didn't back off, I just don't see a point in dealing with you.
    You put a smiley in your post for the first time in this thread in the post quoted above.
    Did you just put the smiley in because you are happy, or does it mean something more?
    Is it something similar to the 'customer' and 'you're not a mod' comments?
    You're going to decide what you think it means anyway, so I see no point in explaining.


  • #50
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,239 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    To the SMODs

    I stated in the op that I did feel that Guan Yin does not act consistently in her moderation of the Soccer forum.
    I stated that I personally believe that a huge majority of the regular posters in the Soccer forum are unhappy with the moderation of Guan Yin.

    I later explained some of my concerns over this moderator and included posts and threads.
    I said that I believe that this moderator does not act fairly across the forum.
    I said that this moderator seems to act irrationally at times.

    I believe that this moderator is gung ho/goes ott with her moderation at times, unlike the other mods in the forum who seem to have a more level headed and consistent approach to moderation.

    I believe that if you read over Guan Yin's posts in this thread from the start you will see what I'm seeing which is huge swings in this moderator's attitude and quite worryingly, some bipolar tendencies. And this has all occurred in one thread.

    You can also see that even though she has called me a liar she has no intention of apologising and does not feel on a personal level that she should apologise.

    Overall you would have to be greatly concerned with the ability of someone to moderate properly when there are such huge swings in their personality as has been evident in this thread.

    I don't expect an apology at this stage as its clear it would only be forced and not genuine.

    Can we not have a discussion regarding the moderation of the soccer forum where people can openly discuss their issues with the moderation/moderators without fear of being banned for posting in the wrong place?

    I feel this would help the moderators a lot and the forum members, although Guan Yin's ability must be seriously questionable with what has gone on in this thread.

    This helpdesk may be helpful to you guys but in fairness it seems like a case of divide and conquer as only one ordinary member can post here. My views I'm certain are held by many, many of the more respected members of the soccer forum.


  • #51
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,190 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    eagle eye wrote: »
    To the SMODs

    I stated in the op that I did feel that Guan Yin does not act consistently in her moderation of the Soccer forum.
    I stated that I personally believe that a huge majority of the regular posters in the Soccer forum are unhappy with the moderation of Guan Yin.

    I later explained some of my concerns over this moderator and included posts and threads.
    I said that I believe that this moderator does not act fairly across the forum.
    I said that this moderator seems to act irrationally at times.

    I believe that this moderator is gung ho/goes ott with her moderation at times, unlike the other mods in the forum who seem to have a more level headed and consistent approach to moderation.
    That's your opinion. I've done my best to read over this thread and get as much information in the shortest time possible. As best I can see, you managed to point out one inconsistency within thousands of words. That's hardly indicative of anything except the fact that GY is human. You're entitled to your opinion. I don't share it (or at least haven't been convinced of it), and the same seems to be true for anyone else who's responded to this thread. You can't continually state your opinion in the hope that eventually everyone will agree with you.
    I believe that if you read over Guan Yin's posts in this thread from the start you will see what I'm seeing which is huge swings in this moderator's attitude and quite worryingly, some bipolar tendencies. And this has all occurred in one thread.
    Now you're diagnosing mental illness? You're aware of how offensive that is?
    You can also see that even though she has called me a liar she has no intention of apologising and does not feel on a personal level that she should apologise.
    I don't see any reason why she should apologise. You implied that she had gone back and deleted all of the evidence you were looking for and Gordon went back (as did I separately - I didn't post because Gordon got there first) and couldn't find any evidence of such. Whether or not you out-and-out accused her is irrelevant. This isn't a court of law. You said you "assumed" they had been deleted, which is an accusation in itself.

    I suggest that you apologise privately to GY for your accusations.
    Can we not have a discussion regarding the moderation of the soccer forum where people can openly discuss their issues with the moderation/moderators without fear of being banned for posting in the wrong place?
    It's worthy of consideration. But it's a tough one. Because first you need to work out whether there actually are a significant number of grievances or just some very noisy angry people. That is, Soccer is the 2nd largest forum on this site. And I would consider it to be the most contentious (everyone has an opinion). Before you could consider listening to the torrent of complaints, you need to decide whether they are 10% of the soccer population or 0.1% of the soccer population.
    The former represents a significant level of unhappiness which can be dealt with as one. The latter represents an insignificant level where each complaint can be dealt with individually.

    There are discussions currently ongoing about this regarding the site as a whole, but it's going to be slow-moving. So don't bother continually asking "when", as you won't get an answer. As best I understand it, changes have been made to the moderation on soccer since this thread started, so sit back and see how they work out.
    This helpdesk may be helpful to you guys but in fairness it seems like a case of divide and conquer as only one ordinary member can post here.
    It's nothing to do with divide and conquer. A single thread for anyone to make their complaint has a very specific problem - nobody's complaint gets listened to. If others were allowed to post on this thread, it would be four times longer but would contain about a tenth of the content.

    If there are very general issues you have with regards to moderation on the soccer forum (as opposed to a single complaint about a single incident, which is what this effectively was) and you know others that feel the same, then I suggest that you all put your heads together, put it into a cogent argument with examples and suggestions on how to fix it and then you start a thread in Feedback where everyone in agreement adds a reply, "I was involved in drafting this thread and I agree with the OP".

    That's the boards equivalent of marching with placards and will be far more effective in getting your point across than everyone piling in and griping about their specific problems with no consideration for the OP.

    On the other hand, if you can't get a rabble together, you are free to start another thread here on Help Desk, but make sure you have a specific complaint to make, as well as evidence to back up your complaint.

    There's nothing more to add. You will want to reply to my post, but having read the rest of this thread you're just going to disagree with me too. I've outlined what you can do next. I was going to lock it, but I imagine that would just result in another thread.

    I'll read your next post, but I'm not going to respond unless it contains some pertinent information which hasn't already been included in this thread and which is significant enough to change my mind. So if you don't get a response, you can assume my response to your next post is, "I disagree". On the other hand, you could choose to not need to the get last word in and go off and do what I suggest without responding to this post at all.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement