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
Complaint about forum moderator
Options
Comments
-
With phrases like witch hunt, slated, attacked being used on this thread in terms of whats happening to FutureGuy. Its probably worth pointing out at this point that while 3 FSA users have made complaints about his modding on thread, a further 9 have supported his modding and made positive suggestions on the future ways to run the forum. Worth highlighting in terms of perspective.0
-
With phrases like witch hunt, slated, attacked being used on this thread in terms of whats happening to FutureGuy. Its probably worth pointing out at this point that while 3 FSA users have made complaints about his modding on thread, a further 9 have supported his modding and made positive suggestions on the future ways to run the forum. Worth highlighting in terms of perspective.
And a few hundred are not commenting either way!
I have been fairly active on the FSA forum this season and honestly dont see a problem with either the posters or the modding. But looking back the issues do mostly seem to occur on matchdays. People just need to chill out a little.
There is that little 'ignore' function that can be used for posters who get your goat up.
Its a nice little community in there, people get on and are very helpful to each other. Sad to see these fractures occuring, but very unnecessary IMO.0 -
Hi Rory,
Thanks for taking time to respond to the feedback. I think it highlights what you perceive to be the problems with my moderation of the forum and I am happy to deal with your feedback separately.Thanks Lolth,
I received 3 PM's asking me to post on this thread, and I have held back until you have permitted me despite my name being mentioned 50+ times. I merely posted to ask for permission to add my feedback now rather than in two weeks. Apologies for the 3,000 word post, but unfortunately there’s a lot to highlight. Despite the tone of Futureguy’s response to me earlier in this thread I’ll try to keep this civil and not respond with the same tone. I’ll aim to simply ‘reference’ past decisions rather than go into detail discussing them as this is not a Dispute Resolution thread.
Let's be clear from the outset. It really doesn't matter who PM'ed you to respond and it doesn't matter how many times you were mentioned. You knew the rules of the site, you STATED you knew the rules of the site, but you broke them anyways. You could have PM'ed a category moderator or an admin for permission, but you didn't. You chose to do so to get a dig in right away...
Its not a Dispute Resolution thread, however when a number of key posters stop posting on the forum due to one moderator, and he has yet another two DR threads in the last two days alone (one from another Boards.ie moderator) its clear that this needs to be discussed.
Right off the bat, you state that key posters have stopped posting because of one moderator, and you posted misleading information about the DRMs. You make the situation look worse than it is. Four posters have stopped posting. You, Danger781, Mr. Incognito and Zarquon. All 4 disagreed with my moderating decisions towards them.
Mr. Incognito had a DM shut almost immediately due to the nature of the post and he has faied to a single shred of information to back up some incredibly serious claims, you have had two DRMs ruled against you and Danger781 has apologised (awaiting his further explanation of his initial comments).The issue I have with Futureguy is a perceived bias in his moderation due to my past history, which has led to heavy handed, inconsistent modding, especially recently. I am not accusing him of anything else and I am not part of any 'witch hunt' against him. The fact that a number of other posters seem to have issues with him recently simply shifts the focus away from me, as I'll admit I was wary of creating some sort of 'Rory v FG' Feedback Thread which I would be unlikely to see any resolution from. Suffice to say I won't be commenting on any other posters bans or infractions. I'll aim to keep it simple, stating the issue I have with FG and backing it up with evidence.
Ok I want this to be stated again. Your issue with me is a perceived bias in his moderation due to my past history which has led to heavy handed, inconsistent modding, especially recently.FG appears to deal with specific posters very differently, and this goes far beyond simply treating newcomers and 'known troublemakers' differently, as I hope I will show evidence for below. I would prefer if specific bans and infractions prior to 2014 are not dragged up in this thread although by all means reference anything from my ‘previous history’ that is relevant to this discussion without simply aiming to paint me in a bad light to ensure that all recent modding actions appear justified. I would prefer that any references pre-2014 are highlighted as such. The reason I ask this is because I'm aware I am being treated a lot harsher due to my conduct on the forum pre-2014 when I used to bite at a lot of Lemlins comments, and prior to this, Carlcon. I’m sure we were both hassle at this time for FG, but as far as I'm aware it has been quite a while since I posted anything bordering on abuse and I think the timelines need to be noted when referring to my 'previous history' as justification for recent harsh responses from the mod in question. Futureguy has readily admitted (in these exact words) that ‘Lemlin is the aggressor in most situations’ yet does not appear to recognise the fact that I have improved my conduct on the forum quite a bit since he threatened us both with forum bans at the end of last year. Lemlin never changed his conduct in any way, still trying to bait me regularly, dragging up old posts, directing abuse at me etc. And yet despite both of us taking very different approaches to the perma-ban threat, he has somehow managed to remain on the Forum. Lolth even highlighted in the first DR thread that moving forward if there is any issue between myself and Lemlin then the ‘instigator will be banned’. Why has this not always the case when FG himself has called Lemlin the instigator?
Ok so after accusing me of having "a perceived bias in his moderation due to my past history which has led to heavy handed, inconsistent modding, especially recently", you would prefer that I don't reference anything pre-2014. Absolutely not as that is bias. I have no intention to paint you in a bad light, I am dealing with facts and facts only. I will let the admins form their own opinions.
First things first, you have posted a part of a private message I sent to you in trust. It doesn't surprise me in the slightest but I am happy to discuss. I have spent time talking to both Lemlin AND Rory privately to try my best to keep them from getting a ban. Yep, actually trying to stop Rory getting a ban.
You chose not to add that information. That's fine.
Around the time of this PM where I said that Lemlin was the aggressor in most situations, that was the situation AT THE TIME Lemlin was cause of more of the hassle than Rory. Now, what I would like to say is that, despite my pleas, you kept reacting to him and getting punished instead of just reporting the post and letting me do my job. And what happened when you eventually reported a bannable post from Lemlin? Yep, Lemlin got the ban and you did not because you let me do my job as a mod.
You chose not to add that information. That's fine.If harshly banning me due to my history with two troublesome posters is something that will never change, how can I continue to post on FSA? Even criminals get the benefit of good behaviour! I can’t see how I can continue to post if my conduct from 2013 and beyond is constantly brought up as justification to ban me for practically anything. I haven't checked through every one of my posts from this year but if you were to exclude posts such as 'Happy Betting folks' which I received a ban for purely due to my 'history' then I think I've been an excellent poster.
How can you keep posting on FSA? Do not break the rules - it's honestly that simple. I'll come to your current behavior in more detail below, but I want to really break this paragraph down first because it definitely needs a touch of context.
Please feel free to correct me I am wrong about facts You publicly had a bet with Lemlin which you lost. You reneged. Is that correct?
So you came on to the forum, took two posts from Lemlin showing that Lemlin placed a bet (post 1) after he saying it was a mugs game (post 2) followed by Happy Betting Folks which goes all the way back to the fact you publicly reneged on bets with said user.
Your history had everything to do with your ban! Plain and simple. I would be a hopeless mod if I didn't ban you for that.
You are saying that you are an excellent poster if I just exclude the incidences where you weren't an excellent poster? Surely you don't expect me to do that right?I would imagine a large number of posters on the forum won't even understand why I get such harsh bans for mundane comments, and I think too much weight is put on conduct from previous years. FG mentioned that he has become stricter across the board due to comments like "lol @ xxxxx owner" which I have had nothing to do with. Every ban/infraction I receive is to do with Lemlin. Simple solution I am told by mods, Cmods and Admins is to simply stick him on ignore. I tried this, however other posters quoted his digs at me to ensure I saw them. FG did not clamp down on any of this so I felt having him on ignore was pretty pointless while he was still freely allowed to reply to me. Besides, the issue has gone way beyond a spat with another poster at this stage.
I'm sorry. Are you suggesting that I have somehow become stricter with you because I have somehow failed to compartmentalize two completely unrelated issues (i.e your behaviour and the lol@xxxx owners?) Incorrect and pretty insulting.
Other posters can quote whatever they want. It is YOU who chooses to respond to them instead of reporting them.To clarify what I mean by this, there was a tongue-in-cheek post yesterday on the forum which I wouldn’t dream of posting these days. I don’t want to get into a debate on this specific post as it is merely an example, but I have no doubt I would receive a ban for this as it would be misconstrued. No need to discuss hypothetical scenarios, I just want to highlight how I’m walking on eggshells posting there, and as mentioned already in this thread I don't appear to be alone in this. Anyway, I don’t want to play the victim here...
It was tounge-in-cheek! It was a laugh! Notice the way I didn't harshly moderate it. No doubt you would have received a ban? Again, you are saying this, not me. You do not want to play the victim? That's EXACTLY what you have done so far!...and would hope to highlight two specific examples below of what I would perceive to be inconsistent and biased modding
EXAMPLE 11. Other posters were able to discuss my recent ban, linking from FSA directly to the thread in the DR forum. This was left up by FG for 6 days prior to me replying. I would question why this was. It is referring to a ban and this is in breach of the Forum Charter. Numerous posters commented on it and it is absurd to assume FG didn’t see it. However as soon as I commented (simply to confirm I got a ban and it was not due to an issue with Lemlin) I received a one month ban. As per the forum charter “Straying off topic will result in post deletion”. Again, I would ask why the posts were not deleted in the six days prior to my ban ending. It has nothing to do with ‘Fantasy Football Chat.’ Again, I don’t want to debate this specific ban as it has already been done in the DR thread, and that is not the point of this feedback thread, but the actions of the moderator(s) here are questionable. I am still serving this ban so discussing it is pointless. I mention it to highlight the moderator actions (or lack of) which led to my ban. It’s worth noting that in the 2nd DR thread I was told by the moderator that “Had you reported these posts, instead of joining in roryc, you'd have been in the clear & I'm sure FutureGuy would have cut the conversation down anyway" and that had the posts been reported I 'might have a case'. I have since been PM’d by another forum regular (who has also stopped posting) to inform me that he had in fact reported the posts but they went ignored by FG. This directly contradicts what I was told in the DR thread, and I was contacted by Mr. E to discuss the situation, something I am still waiting for a resolution on. I did not post this in the DR thread (merely alluded to it) as I have no way to verify if it is correct, but the fact that I haven’t heard a response on it would lead me to think there may be more to it. At first I didn’t want to name the poster as it was a Private Message between us, but I have since clarified to Mr. E that it was who FG thought it was. If the content of the PM is not correct then I apologise for highlighting it now, but I have been more than patient waiting for a resolution on this and after 10 days since initially discussing it with Mr. E (and 5 days since last PM) I think it warrants inclusion on this thread. This should not be the focus of this thread, if you want to take this back to PM I'm happy to do so?
OK. Someone asked where one of the best posters in FSA was. Another poster gave the reason and I think there was 1/2 comments on it. Not numerous. Done. It didn't derail the thread, it served a purpose because your input was missed by other posters. It had everything to do with the chat in the forum and you never reported it despite being very frequent user of the report function.
And here's the part I want to drive home. You state that I simply ignored the post. I am going to call absolute bullsh!t on this. How dare you say that they went ignored. There is a massive difference between ignoring a reported post and reading a reported post, reviewing the context, reviewing any further reports from the affected parties, assessing the overall affect on the forum, and making a decision on whether to act or not (then review the thread to see if the original comment had derailed the thread at a later time). Because that was the case. Yet you choose to think that I ignored it.
You dare accuse me of bias when you show incredible bias against me without a shred of proof to the contrary, apart from the PM of another disgruntled poster who is also clueless to the actual events?
And finally, as been started elsewhere, you did not get a ban for "simply confirming the fact you got and it was not due to Lemlin". You know that, you got the ban for having a dig at me and the moderation of the forum. This was upheld by the category mod that took the DRM. You got a month ban which was upheld in the same DRM.
EXAMPLE 22. This next one is one I think a black and white case of bias. I have been banned for practically every interaction between myself and Lemlin this year, with you using my ‘previous history’ to justify it. Yet you clearly stated via PM that this was not how you were treating Lemlin (see below). You know well that he responded to my posts regularly. Some were nothing more than a comment on FPL, others were perhaps a bit inflammatory. Other times he indirectly referred to me. Below are a select few posts over a two week period prior to my ban where Lemlin repeatedly tried to engage and interact with me. Worth noting that his replies to me over this two week period alone would likely account to more than I have interacted with him in the entire year:
4th September
4th September
3rd September
2nd September
25th August
Most are merely replies to FPL topics, others are critical of tactics/strategy etc. The content is irrelevant though, he should not have been replying to any of my posts in the first place. And yet when I reported one of his posts in the past FG sent me the following:His post on your wildcard was not found to be aggressive and I told you I'm not banning ye from interacting. He make a point relating to FPL and backed it up. I can't ban someone for that.
Timestamp for that final PM, February 2014.
Good report. Ok, you are a proponent of good fair discussion correct? Because this is EXACTLY what Lemlin is doing in every one of these posts. You posted a strategy, he provided a difference of opinion. Yet, incredibly you accuse me of bias AND you accuse me of XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Now, let us look at some of your posts over the same period shall we?
1) After Lemlin had just publicly admitted that he used his wildcards(unlimited transfers) which really didn't work out, RoryC posts...
"Yeah I was amazed by how many seemily sane people used their wildcard before the international break and end of the transfer window. Granted, I've done it after GW1 in the past but thats when there have been 3 or 4 must have players that I didn't have in my original team. A lot of people seem to have used their WC unnecessarily to make a handful of changes, and actually scored worse than they would have had they kept their pre-WC team."
You see, you keep saying that ye should just ignore each other, but you then resort to indirect digs against Lemlin. I'm pretty sure there is another about a player Lemlin transferred out. I'll try and find it later.
2) After Lemlin had posted...."I don't think there'll be a huge difference in points between Boyd, 4 mil cheapie and Krul or Larsson, Pieters and De Gea."
You post...
"OK then, fancy a friendly wager on who will score more between now and xmas? Its not even close."
!!! This is after all the sh!t on forum about you reneging on a bet. Now, this is the point I want to make clear. After I specifically warned you both not to talk about more bets? You stated later that you posted to him by accident. I call absolute bullsh!t on that, especially when you look at the other dig you had on him regarding betting. Where do I get that from? Your history. Again, the history you don't want be to bring up.
So after you accuse me of "a perceived bias in his moderation due to my past history which has led to heavy handed, inconsistent modding, especially recently", that this is the entirely of your case against me? One example where my moderating has been upheld by cMods and admins and second example which shows no bias and attempts to stimulate good discussions.
That's it?These two points directly contradict one another! FG - I will remind you that you already stated in the past that Lemlin was the aggressor in most situations.
Let's put this to bed as you use it again and again. That was the state of play at the time. You keep bringing it up as if it was a reflection of the situation today.Can you see why I have an issue with ‘biased moderating’? You say you can’t ban Lemlin for interacting with me, then a Cmod says this is exactly the reasoning behind my most recent bans.
And this is from September 2014. There is an 8-month gap between two separate posts but you are making it out that it was said around the same time!I do not want to turn this into a back and forth quotefest. FG can respond to this post if he wishes and unless there is something that I really need to respond to from his reply I would happily not post again in this Feedback Thread and let the Admin make whatever decision he/she sees fit. However I feel like I should clarify a few points FG made above which directly reference me:
My point was there have been two Dispute Resolution threads created within the last 2 days to discuss issues with your moderating. Apologies if you misunderstood my point. The fact that one was ‘closed pretty quickly’ and the second has been moved here to Feedback is a moot point – two posters had an issue with you since I was banned and therefore this is clearly not restricted to an issue I alone have with your moderating. The fact that you have posted a thread on the FSA forum itself shows that this is not an issue that is just between myself and yourself, despite that being the catalyst for this whole thread.
You apologise if I misunderstood your point? I misunderstood nothing. You posted something that was bullsh!t and I called you out for it. This is typical RoryC. You have a history of posting something really definite before saying you didn't mean it that way. I'm not buying it for a second.
As for the rest of the comment, you stated very early you want everyone to deal with your case separately, and yet, here you are, bringing up other cases because it suits your needs!
The fact that I have posted on the forum is nothing to do with the fact that it is not an issue between you and me as you state. It is a call to the rest of the forum to come in here and tell the admins, in a safe environment (as it had been allueded there that I am trigger happy and will ban anyone that has a different opinion), what needs to be changed in FSA. Three of the four people I expected to come in here to complain about my moderating have done so.
You, Danger781 and Mr. Incognito. I will let the admins take a look at the disciplinary record of each of you and decide for themselves why ye are all posting on the feedback forum.You actually are incorrect here. I had the initial DR thread go to Admin as I felt that giving both myself and Lemlin equal bans was a bad decision. The Admin ruled in your favour, I left it at that. Worth noting that in 10 years I think this may have been the only thread I have ever referred to an Admin (correct me if I’m wrong?). I don’t do this lightly or to waste peoples time. The second DR thread I created in order to dispute the overly harsh 1 month ban you issued me immediately upon my return. I ended this discussion before it got to an Admin, for two reasons. Firstly, I could not discuss your actions in any way despite them being inherently applicable to the ban in question. I was directed to create a Feedback thread, something I would have done once my current ban was up. Secondly, as I mentioned above I received a PM from another forum regular that directly refuted what the Cmod claimed in the DR thread, therefore I thought it best to close the thread while this was being investigated. This is beside the point - I highlight this solely because you seem adamant that “the theme for this evening is clearly posting inaccurate information as truths” so I think its best to point out where you also appear to be posting inaccurate information.
The DRMs are closed and were ruled my favour, and you were given some seriously good advice from the cMods and admins.FG - you mention above that “Rory came back from a 2 week ban and immediately attacked me as a mod twice in his first three posts. He dragged up a 5-day old post to take a swipe at my decision which is going to be actionable anywhere on boards.ie.” As you have mentioned above, lets not get emotions involved here. I did not 'attack' you, and I did not 'drag up' a 5 day old post. My first four posts when I returned are visible to all. I replied to a 6 day old post that should have been deleted under the Forum Charter, and TWICE asked posters to not discuss it and bring the thread back on topic. Why should I have to stop people discussing a ban of mine when it is clearly against the forum Charter? These posts should all have been deleted, and again I would question why they were not. I should have simply reported the post, but then again it should have been deleted by the mods. Neither followed correct procedure here, the difference being that I received a one month ban while the moderators actions cannot be questioned. The ‘attack’ you mention was me confirming that ‘my issue was not with Lemlin’. This is hardly an ‘attack’ is it? You have insulted me in the past (calling me childish) and I have not reported you for an ‘attack’ on me have I? Had any other poster made this comment coming back from a ban I would be very surprised if they would receive a month ban for the same post. In fact I’ll go as far as to say you would not have issued this ban to anyone else on the forum bar me. Regardless of how we view the situation, the Cmods have again backed you up in the DR thread so I see no reason to discuss the ban itself. I'm sure you have acted within your remit on all these bans and infractions, but as has been highlighted numerous times on this thread the question is did you act in the best interests of the forum? In my opinion your inability to deal with Lemlin correctly has been the catalyst for all this. I accept more than my fair share of blame for reacting to him, however, I'm 4 weeks into a 6 week ban. As a moderator your actions have not been up for any scrutiny up to now, so I think its fair for you to have your say, especially relating to posts like this:
"What I will say is that a number of people are making judgements based on one side of a dispute. I cannot get involved in a dispute and I cannot have my say. If I could, then people may have a different understanding."
There is clearly something you want to get off your chest here. I asked for clarification in the DR thread and was told this needed to be done in Feedback, so now is your chance to elaborate on what it is that is making you treat me differently that anyone else on the forum. I've never had any dealings with you outside of Boards.ie and I'm happy for you to post anything you feel is relevant here. I've gotten a bit heated on PM's before due to the way you've handled Lemlin in the past, but I don't recall ever going over the top. I think I went through every PM between us yesterday and I honestly have no idea what you are referring to?
You go on to say you have ‘no personal gripe with Rory’ – I have no personal gripe with you, why would I? I don’t know you, and up until recently thought you did a good job moderating. I'm not part of any 'witch-hunt' that's out to get you. Like I said at the start of this post, I think you have an issue with me which is causing you moderating to be biased. That's it. The tone of your post below where you feel the need to make it look like I’m trying to cause trouble in this thread would appear to me that you do have an issue with me.
You made a number of accusations against me in the DRMs which were incredibly unfair, inaccurate and very insulting to my moderating. The admins and cMods expertly pulled you up on every point I wanted to address myself. Therefore I have no need to do so now.
If you have not read the DRMs, I would strongly suggest you do so for context as it shows the reasons for my annoyance very clearly, especially since I could not discuss them on the forum as per boards.ie forum.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057284840
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057294648I didn’t create a feedback thread two weeks ago when I asked to close the 2nd DR thread because it was highlighted by the mod that it was a Feedback Issue. Had I created a Feedback thread anyway you would have a point. However, I decided to check with a Cmod to ask if I could post my issue with you here. He advised me to wait until my FSA ban was up, and this is exactly what I have been doing. Unfortunately in the meantime this Feedback Thread has been created and my name has been mentioned no less than 50 times. I feel like this supercedes the forum rule making me wait until my forum ban has ended, especially when my thread then would be identical to this. However, instead of just jumping straight in with my feedback I have asked an Admin for permission to post here. Is this really ‘completely breaking the rules I KNOW are in place’. Is it really a case of me ‘knowing the rules of the site but ignoring them anyway’? I think I’ve shown great restraint to wait two weeks up to now when I feel I have a combined 6 weeks of bans I feel are unfair and unwarranted, AND I still haven’t gotten resolution on the PM issue with yourself and Mr. E. When my name is brought into this Feedback thread then I think its within my right to at least ask if I can include my Feedback now rather than wait two weeks. The fact that you immediately try to (twice) make it look like I'm just here to 'break the rules' is definitely worth noting. There was nothing in my post to warrant the tone of yours. You appear to be letting your personal opinion of me cloud your judgement, which is precisely the issue I am trying to highlight here. On that same note, Danger mentions above that he was issued with a 1 week ban today. Am I right in assuming he shouldn't be able to post in this Forum during that ban? Odd that this hasn't been noted, yet when I simply request permission from an Admin to post I am ‘completely breaking the rules I KNOW are in place’
It is worth noting you broke the rules. Because this is a very clear example of the type of poster you are Rory. The rules are for other people and if you get punished for something, the issue is with the mod. Or the cMod. Or the admin. As for the rest of your comments, this is a feedback thread for FSA. I'm not a mod of this forum.Anyway, to finish... the ideal resolution for me from this Feedback thread would be the following:
• Reconsider how you have handled the past few weeks and look at whether you need to change how you deal with situations like this. The Forum will continue to grow and if its not sorted now it will go one of two ways. Either the moderating will be too lax and it will go the way of TotalFPL and FISO, or heavy handed moderation will drive away good posters which could see a mass exodus, similar to what happened to the Boards.ie Poker Forum a few years back. Surely there is a happy medium? Personally I think you have been too strict in your application of the rules recently, possibly due to doing the work of 2 or 3 mods. As Myrddin says above, if you go through every DR thread by the letter of the charters I have no doubt you can in some way justify every decision you have made. But have they all been in the best interest of the forum? The number of posters highlighting issues in this thread coupled with a few others leaving the Forum would suggest otherwise.
• On a personal note, I would like if you put in place something I've been asking for for a long while. Ban myself and Lemlin from interacting in any way. If we reply to each other, site ban us. I don’t know why this wasn’t done a long time ago. Myrddin has already clarified this is the case for me so it seems logical that you stretch this to also include ‘the instigator’. Moving on from this, recognise that my conduct on the forum has improved over the past 12 months and consider giving me something of a clean slate to work off where my pre-2014 history is not factored into every comment I make. If after 6 months I have not received so much as a warning then please treat me the same as other posters from that point on and do not continue to refer to history from 12-18 months previous to justify bans. I’ve been on Boards almost a decade and you say I am a good contributor to the forum so I don’t think this is asking too much?
• Finally, bring on another objective mod to help out. I can see from your previous post that you are looking for a replace for Mr Prodston which is good news. I’m aware that the Forum already has a second moderator in Mr. Moon, but with all due respect you appear to deal with 90%+ of the issues on FSA, at least when it concerns me. I don’t think I have had any interaction with Mr. Moon in the past 12 months.
I've no issue with you, although I do think you have an issue with me. I'm sure I've given you plenty of reasons in the past to dislike me but as moderator of the forum I don't think you should let a personal grudge get in the way of fair moderating. Despite this being a ridiculously long post I think I have been civil throughout, so I would ask you do the same with your reply.
Thanks
1) I have reconsidered everything I have done in the past few weeks in relation to you. I stand my every single decision I made, decisions that have been backed up by 2 DRMs.
2) An admin has already put this in place since your DRM. It's a sad state when the admins have resorted to this. However, and I am stating this for the record, if I feel that either of you are indirectly attacking the other, you will be punished. As for your conduct over the last 12 months, I do not think you have shown a lot of improvement. You have shown flippant disregard for my moderating and the rules, you have been banned a number of times and you have posted a number of hurtful and disrespectful comments about me. Having said that, if you follow the rules of the forum - the rules that apply to everyone - you will have nothing to worry about in terms of bans.
3) We are working on it.
Rory. I have zero issue with you as a person. You are an excellent contributor and we all appreciate your contribution. You would be a loss to the forum if you chose to leave or if you were permabanned. But I refuse to let you break the rules. If you stay within the rules, you will have no issues going forward.
Admins, I have made my case. I stand by my decisions on all aspects of moderating relating to Rory.
Futureguy0 -
So basically a soccer forum with no entry requirements and 1 active moderator is troublesome? No way.0
-
-
Advertisement
-
Join Date:Posts: 70739
-
-
So basically a soccer forum with no entry requirements and 1 active moderator is troublesome? No way.
That's pretty inaccurate description of the forum if I'm being honest.
There are no posts pertaining to pure soccer allowed. We have a strict policy on this. Thankfully, it's something I don't have to enforce as everyone keeps to the rules on this. The posters deserve a lot of credit for that.0 -
So basically a soccer forum with no entry requirements and 1 active moderator is troublesome? No way.
It is in no way like any soccer forum and does not help to paint it as such. There is no tribalism among supporters of different clubs in the FSA.
Considering that everyone in the forum is essentially competing against one another the level of camaraderie between posters is an absolute credit to those involved in the forum. A little more "tension" has crept in recently which I hope can be lightened as part of this feedback and the natural outcomes.
The difference of opinion between posters and moderators over disciplinary issues which has resulted in the creation of this thread has absolutely nothing to do with soccer. Soccer is just a means for a game that posters in the forum play to exist. When the Autumn Internationals and 6 nations are on we have a fantasy rugby game too which diversifies from soccer.0 -
Mr.Prodston wrote: »It is in no way like any soccer forum and does not help to paint it as such. There is no tribalism among supporters of different clubs in the FSA.
Considering that everyone in the forum is essentially competing against one another the level of camaraderie between posters is an absolute credit to those involved in the forum. A little more "tension" has crept in recently which I hope can be lightened as part of this feedback and the natural outcomes.
The difference of opinion between posters and moderators over disciplinary issues which has resulted in the creation of this thread has absolutely nothing to do with soccer. Soccer is just a means for a game that posters in the forum play to exist. When the Autumn Internationals and 6 nations are on we have a fantasy rugby game too which diversifies from soccer.
It's a testament to everyone when I say I have no idea of the clubs that 95% of the people support in the forum. The only ones I do know are the lads in the United forum!0 -
Advertisement
-
Fwiw, I've been following this thread (and the DR ones) with interest.
FG, from what I've read, has handled everything extremely well, even when faced with some nasty comments.0 -
I had hoped that this wouldn't turn into a quote-fest but I would like to respond to your post in detail and there's no better time than now to do it. Gives people some bedtime reading too! Lets keep this civil and there shouldn't be a problem.Let's be clear from the outset. It really doesn't matter who PM'ed you to respond and it doesn't matter how many times you were mentioned. You knew the rules of the site, you STATED you knew the rules of the site, but you broke them anyways. You could have PM'ed a category moderator or an admin for permission, but you didn't. You chose to do so to get a dig in right away...
This really highlights one of the key issues here. Yes, I 'broke a rule' by posting here and had an Admin infracted me for it I would have accepted it. However, its the ethos behind the rule which in my opinion is what should be followed. From Feedbacks Charter:
"Users currently serving a ban from a forum with a duration over 1 month are not allowed to post on feedback threads concerning that forum. Once the ban is lifted or the term has ended, then the user is more than welcome to participate. This is to stem a growing trend of banned users hijacking threads to either appeal a ban or take the opoprtunity to make life more difficult for the mod or mods that imposed the ban in the first place. Any post reported, if posted after this amendment to the charter and during a ban period will be investigated. Any user found breaking this rule will have a ban from feedback imposed on them, without warning, that will only be lifted when their original forum ban has expired or has been lifted. To appeal a ban, please use the Dispute Resolution forum and follow the Dispute resolution procedure. If you wish to complain outside of that process, please feel free to do so on any of the other forums hosted outside of the boards.ie/adverts.ie servers."
Firstly, my ban is 1 month (with 2 weeks left to run) so I'm unsure if this rule even applies to me? If not your entire point is irrelevant and I was OK to post here anyway, despite taking the precaution of asking permission first. I'm unsure why you felt the need to point this out, as you said you are not a moderator of this forum. Secondly, I am not trying to appeal a ban or take the opportunity to make life more difficult for any mod. So I am not going against the reason this rule was created in the first place. I posted to ask permission to give my feedback now, rather than in two weeks. Had the Admin asked me to wait two weeks I would have done so. Stop trying to paint a negative picture of me, I have refrained from doing so to you. I did not 'have a dig' at you so please stop playing the victim here. All this talk of 'witch hunts' and 'attacks' is tiring. I can't speak for other posters but I have no interest in attacking anyone. People have posted about 'nasty comments' towards FG - they have not come from me.Right off the bat, you state that key posters have stopped posting because of one moderator, and you posted misleading information about the DRMs. You make the situation look worse than it is. Four posters have stopped posting. You, Danger781, Mr. Incognito and Zarquon. All 4 disagreed with my moderating decisions towards them.
What misleading information? Are you again referring back to me saying you 'had two DM's against you'? I have no problem with how I phrased this. There were two threads in the DR Forum about your moderating. One from Mr. Incognito and one from Danger (which has since been moved to Feedback to become this thread). The way I phrased this is not misleading, the fact that you have chosen to interpret it incorrectly is not my fault.Mr. Incognito had a DM shut almost immediately due to the nature of the post and he has faied to a single shred of information to back up some incredibly serious claims, you have had two DRMs ruled against you and Danger781 has apologised (awaiting his further explanation of his initial comments).
Not sure why this is relevant but yes, everything here is correct. It doesn't affect my original point which was to highlight that two other posters aside from myself had an issue with you so happy to agree with you on the above. What their issues were or what happened after they posted them in the DR Forum is irrelevant, I'm not sure why you are focusing on this other than to again make this personal and try to insinuate I am lying or backtracking. I stand by what I said, and it was an irrelevant point to even pick up on.Ok I want this to be stated again. Your issue with me is a perceived bias in his moderation due to my past history which has led to heavy handed, inconsistent modding, especially recently.
Ok so after accusing me of having "a perceived bias in his moderation due to my past history which has led to heavy handed, inconsistent modding, especially recently", you would prefer that I don't reference anything pre-2014. Absolutely not as that is bias. I have no intention to paint you in a bad light, I am dealing with facts and facts only. I will let the admins form their own opinions.
You are mistaken again. I did not ask you 'not to reference anything pre-2014'. In fact I said the exact opposite, all I asked was that you highlight when it was. You are free to reference whatever you please. Here it is:
"I would prefer if specific bans and infractions prior to 2014 are not dragged up in this thread although by all means reference anything from my ‘previous history’ that is relevant to this discussion without simply aiming to paint me in a bad light to ensure that all recent modding actions appear justified."First things first, you have posted a part of a private message I sent to you in trust. It doesn't surprise me in the slightest but I am happy to discuss. I have spent time talking to both Lemlin AND Rory privately to try my best to keep them from getting a ban. Yep, actually trying to stop Rory getting a ban.
You chose not to add that information. That's fine.
Apologies, I was under the impression that PM's could be posted in a Feedback Thread. I read the DR Forum Charter and PM's are allowed to be posted in the there, so I had assumed this was the case here. If not then again, I apologise.
And I agree, you have tried in the past to stop us getting ourselves banned. My refusal to include that does not mean I deny it...Around the time of this PM where I said that Lemlin was the aggressor in most situations, that was the situation AT THE TIME Lemlin was cause of more of the hassle than Rory. Now, what I would like to say is that, despite my pleas, you kept reacting to him and getting punished instead of just reporting the post and letting me do my job. And what happened when you eventually reported a bannable post from Lemlin? Yep, Lemlin got the ban and you did not because you let me do my job as a mod.
You chose not to add that information. That's fine.
Again, I agree here. Of all the posts I reported, one of them made it through and Lemlin received a ban. I even recall you sending me a PM afterwards. Again, my refusal to include that does not mean I deny that you did it. My first post is already ridiculously long, I can't include everything can I!How can you keep posting on FSA? Do not break the rules - it's honestly that simple. I'll come to your current behavior in more detail below, but I want to really break this paragraph down first because it definitely needs a touch of context.
Please feel free to correct me I am wrong about facts You publicly had a bet with Lemlin which you lost. You reneged. Is that correct?
So you came on to the forum, took two posts from Lemlin showing that Lemlin placed a bet (post 1) after he saying it was a mugs game (post 2) followed by Happy Betting Folks which goes all the way back to the fact you publicly reneged on bets with said user.
Unsure how my bet is in any way relevant but as you've posted it I'll respond. I think Lemlin should have been banned from the forum a long time ago, and when he offered me a wager (that’s correct, LEMLIN offered a wager) that was something along the lines of whoever finishes higher in FPL at the end of the season would win the bet. If I won Lemlin would leave the forum, if he won I would have to ‘stop moaning’. You think I was going to turn down a chance to get rid of my main problem poster? No chance! If I lost I think I was to give up 'moaning on the forum'. Granted this is a fairly broad term but either way I would have agreed to anything. Once I lost the bet it would have been quite difficult not to renege on my forfeit. A simple "Ah FFS Rooney!" on a gameweek thread would have done the job. As you know I work in the industry and had this been a real cash wager I would have specified numerous T+C's prior to making the bet. Instead I jumped at the opportunity to see Lemlin leave the forum. My forfeit didn't even cross my mind. Apologies if this offended you, but I'm unsure what its relevance is to this Feedback Thread.Your history had everything to do with your ban! Plain and simple. I would be a hopeless mod if I didn't ban you for that.
You are saying that you are an excellent poster if I just exclude the incidences where you weren't an excellent poster? Surely you don't expect me to do that right?
My point here is that my history has everything to do with every ban and infraction I seem to have received from you this year. I am not saying you are incorrect in taking my history into account but when it becomes the deciding factor in every decision it ends up with me walking on eggshells on the forum, unable to fully relax for fear that something I post will be interpreted incorrectly. I probably post on average 150+ times a month on the FSA forum, and my point was that aside from the few times where I have bitten at Lemlin I think I have contributed well, and I feel none of this is ever taken into account. I don't ask to you to change the rules for me, I never have. How you interpret my posts and your implementation of the rules when applied to different posters is what I have an issue with.I'm sorry. Are you suggesting that I have somehow become stricter with you because I have somehow failed to compartmentalize two completely unrelated issues (i.e your behaviour and the lol@xxxx owners?) Incorrect and pretty insulting. Other posters can quote whatever they want. It is YOU who chooses to respond to them instead of reporting them.
The General modding of the Forum has become stricter and your handling of me has also become stricter at the same time. Highlighting this coincidence is not inferring that you cannot compartmentalise, no reason to feign insult.It was tounge-in-cheek! It was a laugh! Notice the way I didn't harshly moderate it. No doubt you would have received a ban? Again, you are saying this, not me. You do not want to play the victim? That's EXACTLY what you have done so far!
You have also done your fair share of playing the victim FG. Not insulting you, just pointing it out.EXAMPLE 1
OK. Someone asked where one of the best posters in FSA was. Another poster gave the reason and I think there was 1/2 comments on it. Not numerous. Done. It didn't derail the thread, it served a purpose because your input was missed by other posters. It had everything to do with the chat in the forum and you never reported it despite being very frequent user of the report function.
And here's the part I want to drive home. You state that I simply ignored the post. I am going to call absolute bullsh!t on this. How dare you say that they went ignored. There is a massive difference between ignoring a reported post and reading a reported post, reviewing the context, reviewing any further reports from the affected parties, assessing the overall affect on the forum, and making a decision on whether to act or not (then review the thread to see if the original comment had derailed the thread at a later time). Because that was the case. Yet you choose to think that I ignored it.
You dare accuse me of bias when you show incredible bias against me without a shred of proof to the contrary, apart from the PM of another disgruntled poster who is also clueless to the actual events?
And finally, as been started elsewhere, you did not get a ban for "simply confirming the fact you got and it was not due to Lemlin". You know that, you got the ban for having a dig at me and the moderation of the forum. This was upheld by the category mod that took the DRM. You got a month ban which was upheld in the same DRM.
There were 3 comments after Kev's original post, not 1 or 2. I would say 3 is numerous. This is being pedantic but you seem to be a stickler for facts so there it is.
You have stated that you read the post in the Chat Thread (and reported posts?) and felt there was no need to act on it. I have nothing else to say on this if you didn't think this was against the Forum Charter.EXAMPLE 2
Timestamp for that final PM, February 2014.
Good report. Ok, you are a proponent of good fair discussion correct? Because this is EXACTLY what Lemlin is doing in every one of these posts. You posted a strategy, he provided a difference of opinion. Yet, incredibly you accuse me of bias AND you accuse me of XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Unsure what XXXXXXX is referring to here but yes, I think your decisions have been biased. I am not accusing you of anything else, remember, I'm not in any witch hunt. I've been very clear on what my issues are. As for Lemlins posts, I already pointed I was of the impression that we should not be engaging with each other at all, regardless of the content. Something which was implicitly stated my Myrddin in the DR thread as the reasoning behind my recent ban. To answer your point above, yes I am a proponent of fair discussion. But discussion with Lemlin? Of that I have no interest, and you are well aware of this. I have spelled it out to you via PM as well as numerous times in the forum itself when I lost my head (and was rightly banned) for saying as such. What do you think his motives were behind repeatedly replying to me when I have asked him repeatedly over the years to not try to engage me? Again and again I asked him not to reply to my posts, and again and again he did. Freely. The content is irrelevant.Now, let us look at some of your posts over the same period shall we?
1) After Lemlin had just publicly admitted that he used his wildcards(unlimited transfers) which really didn't work out, RoryC posts...
"Yeah I was amazed by how many seemily sane people used their wildcard before the international break and end of the transfer window. Granted, I've done it after GW1 in the past but thats when there have been 3 or 4 must have players that I didn't have in my original team. A lot of people seem to have used their WC unnecessarily to make a handful of changes, and actually scored worse than they would have had they kept their pre-WC team."
This is an assumption on your behalf that I am referring to Lemlin, who hadn't posted in that thread for 50 posts before I did, and it was nothing to do with a wildcard. If we are going down that road, what are your thoughts on this post? It could be taken as referring to me, but I would prefer not to go down the route of assumptions. Lets stick to the facts.You see, you keep saying that ye should just ignore each other, but you then resort to indirect digs against Lemlin. I'm pretty sure there is another about a player Lemlin transferred out. I'll try and find it later.
2) After Lemlin had posted...."I don't think there'll be a huge difference in points between Boyd, 4 mil cheapie and Krul or Larsson, Pieters and De Gea."
You post...
"OK then, fancy a friendly wager on who will score more between now and xmas? Its not even close."
!!! This is after all the sh!t on forum about you reneging on a bet. Now, this is the point I want to make clear. After I specifically warned you both not to talk about more bets? You stated later that you posted to him by accident. I call absolute bullsh!t on that, especially when you look at the other dig you had on him regarding betting. Where do I get that from? Your history. Again, the history you don't want be to bring up.
I have never said I do not want history being brought up, this is your total misinterpretation of my post. Please go back and re-read it. Bring up any history you want but this is not a DR thread. I bring up examples to highlight where I think your moderating actions have been questionable, therefore keeping this thread on topic. You are bringing up previous posts of mine which don't seem to be relevant and seem to have the sole goal of trying to discredit me.So after you accuse me of "a perceived bias in his moderation due to my past history which has led to heavy handed, inconsistent modding, especially recently", that this is the entirely of your case against me? One example where my moderating has been upheld by cMods and admins and second example which shows no bias and attempts to stimulate good discussions.
That's it?
Yes, in your opinion that is my entire case. As I have said above if you do not think there was any need to delete the posts referring to my ban as they were against the Forum Charter, then I have nothing else to say on number 1.
As for number 2, you have cut out the quote from Myrddin which explicity stated that I could be banned 'simply for interacting with Lemlin' while you have clearly reaffirmed that this was not that case for Lemlin himself. Which is it?Let's put this to bed as you use it again and again. That was the state of play at the time. You keep bringing it up as if it was a reflection of the situation today.
OK. I wasn't aware the 'state of play' had changed whereby I could be banned simply for interacting with lemlin, but he had since moved to a new level where he was no longer 'the instigator' and was therefore free to reply to me. I'm not sure why the timing is important here. What had changed? When had it changed? As far as I reacall, between February and prior to these recent bans, Lemlin had equal if not more FSA bans than me over that period, so what initiated this change in the 'state of play' - Or do you simply mean that the way you viewed myself and Lemlin changed over the course of that time?And this is from September 2014. There is an 8-month gap between two separate posts but you are making it out that it was said around the same time!
As above, I'm not sure how the time difference is relevant to treating myself and Lemlin differently, however I agree with your timescale if its an important point.You apologise if I misunderstood your point? I misunderstood nothing. You posted something that was bullsh!t and I called you out for it. This is typical RoryC. You have a history of posting something really definite before saying you didn't mean it that way. I'm not buying it for a second.
As per my post above, i have no problem with how I phrased '2 DR threads against you' to refer to the two threads Mr Incognito and Danger made. If you feel this is 'bullsh*t' and 'typical Rory' that's your prerogitive. I don't see the need to discuss this point any further. Your posts are leaning towards personal insults so best to leave it at that.As for the rest of the comment, you stated very early you want everyone to deal with your case separately, and yet, here you are, bringing up other cases because it suits your needs!
Unsure what you are referring to here, elaborate and I'm happy to answer.The fact that I have posted on the forum is nothing to do with the fact that it is not an issue between you and me as you state. It is a call to the rest of the forum to come in here and tell the admins, in a safe environment (as it had been allueded there that I am trigger happy and will ban anyone that has a different opinion), what needs to be changed in FSA. Three of the four people I expected to come in here to complain about my moderating have done so.
You, Danger781 and Mr. Incognito. I will let the admins take a look at the disciplinary record of each of you and decide for themselves why ye are all posting on the feedback forum.
I’m unsure what you are trying to say here. Three of us created threads in the DR Forum about your moderation (one of which was moved here to create this thread) and you guessed that we would want some input into a feedback thread on you? Why would Admins need to look at our disciplinary record? We are posting on this Forum because we have an issue with your moderating, where else do you expect us to discuss it? I’m confused as to what point you are trying to make here. I have tried to be civil throughout, something which I'm unsure can be said about other posters. Do I not have a right to post in the Feedback Forum if I have an issue with its moderation? Again, there is no witch hunt here, at least none that I'm a party of.The DRMs are closed and were ruled my favour, and you were given some seriously good advice from the cMods and admins.
You made a number of accusations against me in the DRMs which were incredibly unfair, inaccurate and very insulting to my moderating. The admins and cMods expertly pulled you up on every point I wanted to address myself. Therefore I have no need to do so now.
I'd like you to specifically tell me what 'your side of the story' is in reference to my harsh bans. I was expecting a PM exchange or some kind of abuse outside of Boards.ie if I'm honest, both of which I knew I had not done. I've seen nothing to back up your original post after banning me that there was more to the story than people knew. What exactly are you referring to? I wouldn't normally push this but you were so keen on posting it to justify giving me a one months ban that I assumed you had some bombshell to drop...If you have not read the DRMs, I would strongly suggest you do so for context as it shows the reasons for my annoyance very clearly, especially since I could not discuss them on the forum as per boards.ie forum.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057284840
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057294648
I assume this is not aimed at me, and I have no issue with anyone reading these DRMs if they want more background on why I received a two week ban, and then a one month ban.It is worth noting you broke the rules. Because this is a very clear example of the type of poster you are Rory. The rules are for other people and if you get punished for something, the issue is with the mod. Or the cMod. Or the admin. As for the rest of your comments, this is a feedback thread for FSA. I'm not a mod of this forum.
I have no issue with the rules. Perhaps I don't get my point across well enough at times. My issue is not with the rules, rather the application of them. Please name one rule from either the Forum Charter of Boards.ie Charter that I have specified I have a direct issue with? I may not agree with the rulings of the Cmods or Admins but I have no issue with them as long as they are civil to me.1) I have reconsidered everything I have done in the past few weeks in relation to you. I stand my every single decision I made, decisions that have been backed up by 2 DRMs.
No problem.2) An admin has already put this in place since your DRM. It's a sad state when the admins have resorted to this. However, and I am stating this for the record, if I feel that either of you are indirectly attacking the other, you will be punished. As for your conduct over the last 12 months, I do not think you have shown a lot of improvement. You have shown flippant disregard for my moderating and the rules, you have been banned a number of times and you have posted a number of hurtful and disrespectful comments about me. Having said that, if you follow the rules of the forum - the rules that apply to everyone - you will have nothing to worry about in terms of bans.
I disagree that it is a sad state, I requested it from you a number of times to ban us interacting and I'm unsure why you were hesitant to do so. It would have ended all of this a hell of a lot sooner. I'm not for a second putting the onus of blame on you, but I honestly don't understand why you were hesitant to put this ban in place. Im surprised you dont think I have shown any improvement but thats your opinion, not going to argue it, although if you accuse me of posting a 'number of hurtful and disrespectful comments about you' I would like to see some proof please.3) We are working on it.Rory. I have zero issue with you as a person. You are an excellent contributor and we all appreciate your contribution. You would be a loss to the forum if you chose to leave or if you were permabanned. But I refuse to let you break the rules. If you stay within the rules, you will have no issues going forward.
No Problem.Admins, I have made my case. I stand by my decisions on all aspects of moderating relating to Rory.
I understand this was another long post however I intended to address ALL points that FG has taken the time out to post, not selectively pick and choose the ones I am comfortable answering. I'm happy to end it here and leave it all to the Admins but if FG wants to reply to any of the above I will happily respond back if he so wishes. I would definitely like you to clarify where I have posted 'a number of hurtful and disrespectful comments about you' though. I will not pretend I am overly offended by this comment as some would, but I think you should back up any claims you make, just as any poster on this thread should.
I’ve been civil throughout this thread which is more than I can say for others. Another moderator is coming on board in FSA so this should alleviate some of the workload on FG, and Lemlin has finally been banned from replying to any of my posts, although it’s likely too little too late as I don’t think I’ll continue to be a regular poster on the forum.
Good luck folks.0 -
It's similar to soccer in that there are matchday threads that result in outrageous statements that get said in the heat of the moment and can cause trouble imo.
I'm more of a lurker because I didn't like the people who get the luck over a period getting on their high horse talking down to people at the start. It has changed for the better the last year or so I think though and I've always found FG to be in the right with a very difficult few people not following instructions. Should have been harder on them if anything but because they were part of the community he did everything to accommodate them. I wouldn't have been so accommodating so Fairplay to him.
Edit: that post above mine must be breaking some post length record
is it really that serious to you? 0 -
The best thing about the FSA forum is that its so different from the soccer forum. Most people support PL teams but thats not what fantasy football is about. People who let who they support cloud their FF judgement will struggle at the game. I also 100% agree that FG has done a great job in not allowing the forum get like other forums with LOL at xxxx owners comments or in allowing provocative comments about certain teams in the league. Its what makes our forum the best one out there.
Somebody has to be in charge of us and keep us in check and from my 2 years posting on the forum I can say in no way would I feel FG is biased.
Id be dissapointed to lose the likes of Rory C and Zarquon as I value their opinions . I think people need to take a step back and realise its just a game and start afresh.. Ive had disagreements with a few people over the years that at the time you may think is important its really not worth getting overly worked up over it though. In reality none of us know each other personally and we are just a bunch of random people who think we have all the FF answers. The FSA forum is just a bit of fun that helps most of us earn a few quid lets keep it that way and lets see if anyone can top KEVIRLs epic post from last year.0 -
Some people need to realise that they are not as important to a forum as they seem to think they are, the rules apply to everyone. Being a popular and regular contributor does not entitle one to lenient treatment. Unfortunately there are posters who no matter how many actions are taken against them they are incapable of seeing that they are the ones at fault, it's only ever the fault of moderators.
People making grand announcements of "I won't be posting here much anymore/ at all" kind of brings me back to people needing to realise they are not as important as they think they are. It's an internet forum, we are all replaceable, life goes on without us. People come and go all the time, some stick around longer than others.0 -
zombieHanalei wrote: »Some people need to realise that they are not as important to a forum as they seem to think they are, the rules apply to everyone. Being a popular and regular contributor does not entitle one to lenient treatment. Unfortunately there are posters who no matter how many actions are taken against them they are incapable of seeing that they are the ones at fault, it's only ever the fault of moderators.
People making grand announcements of "I won't be posting here much anymore/ at all" kind of brings me back to people needing to realise they are not as important as they think they are. It's an internet forum, we are all replaceable, life goes on without us. People come and go all the time, some stick around longer than others.
Assume you are referring to me here. It's not a grand announcement and I hardly think the forum will fall apart if I don't post there as much. I'm one of a number of good contributors there, I don't assume my input will be missed that much. I'm also aware how Boards works, I've been posting here almost a decade. I've admitted numerous times where I'm at fault, and I have enough bans and infractions to prove as much. Numerous other posters on this thread have also accepted blame when applicable to their issue. I have yet to see any moderator on this thread appear to be anything other than infallible though.
I do find it odd having to justify my posts to posters who don't appear to be familiar with the forum but still happy to pass judgement on it, however I guess that is the purpose of the Feedback Forum so I'll reply to anyone that directs a post at me. Can't say it would appeal to me to browse Feedback reading threads that didn't relate to a forum that I post in though.
Cheers0 -
Ah jaysus lads. I've been posting on fantasy football related threads since 2008 on boards. Stop been dicks. Lemlin and RoryC. Your little spat is embarrassing.
Mr. Incognito, you were trolling with the grammar Nazi post.
That's not to say ye are not good posters. Just chill the **** out.0 -
I hesitated in mentioning this in my initial post in this thread but I feel my thoughts here might be of relevance and can give people a little more insight into things.
My personal opinion is that a Moderator should really not have to do anything other than some administration in a forum in a perfect world i.e close, merge threads, remove spammers and perhaps help guide new posters in a forum. Any poster that goes out of their way to have spats or cause any kind of trouble clearly cannot have much respect for their fellow posters, the moderators who are volunteers and the forum itself. Every time somebody does something against the rules it means that a moderator has to give up their free time to try and solve things. I don't think that's cool if anybody deliberately does something they know to be wrong.
Of course disagreements can happen in the heat of the moment as this is not a perfect world. However if this continues for days, weeks, months, years I personally think this is unacceptable. If posters have a problem with one another they should take it to PM or elsewhere. Not continue to cause problems in the forum where other posters try and have discussions.
Why should anyone apart from those who don't get along have to put up with such petty bickering? I was very selfish and decided to step down as moderator because I really did not want to have to deal with grown adults involved in a conflict that has absolutely nothing to do with me. There were other reasons I stepped down but if I'm totally honest this formed a part of my thinking. To a certain extent I'm talking about roryc and Lemlin here but not exclusively it's just that their disagreements and how they have been dealt with form a great deal of this feedback. I really like both posters when they're not at each other throats or delicately tickling each other from afar and we have had some great discussions and camaraderie which I hope will continue for a long time to come. Both are exceptional players and provide some fantastic insight but rules need to be adhered to and because of that both are probably exceptionally lucky to not be permabanned in my opinion. It is to FutureGuy's testament that this is not the case. To be fair in my brief time as mod I don't believe there was much hassle if any other than some tit for tat posts being reported. Each post that was reported would be sent to my email and that can get tiresome. I must stress that reporting posts that should be reported is vital and actively encouraged. It is possible to miss things even if they're under your nose. Obviously I was not cut out to be a mod nor have as much patience as I thought :pac: That is both a criticism of myself and of abusing the report function.
I really want to emphasise this again that as a poster I consider both roryc and lemlin as friends in terms of the fantasy sports arena and boards as a whole and I hope they appreciate the honesty of what I had to say. I would expect no less honesty from them or anyone else. However they have not made life easy for those modding regardless of whether or not it was intended. It may be the case that people, and I'm speaking generally here, don't fully realise that mods are people. Volunteers. Trying to help the community in which they are involved.
I would hope that people can see where I'm coming from. People say mods have a thankless task but they don't know the full ins and outs until they are in that position. FutureGuy is one of the Fantasy Sports Arena's greatest assets and some of the treatment and things said against him has upset me as a poster in the forum and as somebody who I think has a relatively solid grasp of what is going on. Generally speaking the forum is great and there is rarely any hassle but the past 2 months has seen an upturn in squabbling which I don't recall there to be in the time I have been posting.
Considering that this thread opened with a call for FutureGuy's head I would hope that he stays firmly where he is. It seems that another mod is on the way soon which is great news and I hope that whoever it is does a much better job than I did and lasts a lot longer. They'll need to time to learn the ropes and I would hope that everyone gives them time to settle in and be on even greater behaviour than normal. I also hope that roryc continues to post frequently with his high quality of post. The place wouldn't be the same without him but that is his decision obviously.
Most importantly is that we need to get the forum back in good spirits and come out the otherside of this feedback in a better place. I also hope this little bit of feedback will give people a better insight into modding and the things they do in their own free time for little reward (although the sweet avatar of Mickey Turner was nice to be able to put in).
Note: I apologise if some things are not worded as I intended but it is difficult to do so. There is absolutely no malice in what I say just as honest an assessment as I can put into words. I would hope and imagine everyone would agree.0 -
Hi admins,
I'm going to quickly respond to some of Rory's points that haven't been covered above or in either DRM last month. After that, unless I get any more complaints on how I am moderating the forum, I will ask you to look at the charges put against me from the three posters who have created DRMs and have made accusations against me. I'm still awaiting examples from two posters and Rory has made his opinions perfectly clear.
I have posted on the FSA forum that there is a feedback forum open here so that anyone who has grievances about how I mod the forum could be addressed. I would like everyone to be given time to have their say if they wish.
Rory,
The fact that you are such a good poster is the reason you probably haven't received a permaban by now. If I can be accused of anything, it is that I have been far too lenient on you both given the fact that you are both excellent contributors.
So after thinking about it alot today, I have decided to show everyone why you got the 1-month ban. Rory, you keep talking about I was being unfair and harsh with the month ban so I'm going to put everything out in the open.
When you and Lemlin were banned in September for 2 weeks each, I told you both via PM that I was done with pandering to both of you and that the next time it will be a month ban.
Well here is the side that I have been keeping private until I have been given no option but to reveal. I didn't want to post this on the FSA forum, which is why I asked people to remember that there is more than one side to the story. My business that I conduct on PM with my forum visitors is my own, and I hoped that Rory would simply remember this PM and drop the talk of unfair ban length. I'm not going to post any one else's PM, just my own. I like keeping my stuff private but it's necessary to post now.
Hi guys! Hope ye are both well!
So Rory, you ask Lemlin to make a bet, after I begged you not to bring up old ****.
Lemlin, you bring up old posts after I begged you both not to do it.
I have had to spend a lot of my valuable time this week evaluating the reported posts relating to both of ye. This may come as a shock, but I am a pretty smart guy and I can see through subtle digs pretty quickly.
But that's not why I'm writing. Ye've both been great contributors up until a few days ago. Enough excuses, I think it's fair to say that I have been incredibly lenient but I feel my message is not getting through.
I said do not bring up the past. Rory, you tried to wager Lemlin after your history. Lemlin you replied and brought up an old post instead of reporting AND just walking away. Looking at my notes on both of you, I think that's enough.
Two week ban (should be a month but I'll leave that for the next time ye decided to waste my time).
I hate doing this. Ye are both good lads who add a ton to the forum, but I'm done now.
Please free to discuss with the CMod teams. They have been already told that you have both decided to restart this and they are aware of your history.
Thanks
Tony
Rory came back from said two week ban and almost immediately attacked my moderating decisions, took a dig at me and got the one month ban I referenced. The cMods upheld the ban. Lemlin came back from his two week ban, served a 2 week site ban for another reason, came back, shut up about the decision and returned to providing excellent input. You decided to open a DRM on my unfair and bias treatment of you and he took it on the chin and got on with things. Despite the fact you both got the same length of ban.
It was very annoying to me that I had to ban ye because ye finished last season well and things were looking ok this season, but it didn't last.
So there you have it. Admins, that should remove any doubt about harshness of the bans to bed, if there was any to begin with. In addition to all the responses I have made relating to my "personal issue" with Rory, this also indicates the compete opposite. It shows a mod who has been incredibly patient with two posters who decided to abandon all the feedback and previous warnings to start up things again. It also shows that the mod has clearly laid things out - great posters, but enough is enough.
And Rory, reread your second DRM where you claim to have reread everything I ever PMed you and couldn't see anything about the matter in hand and how I tried deal with it, even though the CMOD clearly asked you again were you sure I didn't sent any PMs that would cover this. You completely denied it and so now I have posted it. Again, this is just another oversight?
Regarding your other points Rory...
Regarding misleading information and selective presentation of information, I'll allow admins to reread your posts here, in the DRMs and in the forum and let them come to their own conclusions. You have already made it clear that I am reading things wrong etc so am not going to continue.
You ask to keep things civil but you end you last long comment with a clear attack on me. So I'm pretty much done responding to your claims here.
You state that you are unsure what previous actions have to do with the feedback thread. You accuse me of bias and unfair moderation. I am using your history to show otherwise.
You brought up the betting by referencing the "Happy betting folks" so I explained it in more detailed. Your recent bet with Lemlin is perfectly actionable given the history from your last bet.
I'm not going to get into the chronological aspects of your posts. LoLth has already said it better than I could.
Let's make this super clear. I am not feigning insult. You have, in recent DRMs, here, and on FSA, done plenty to insult me and my moderation of the forum. Nothing phony about it...to suggest otherwise is pretty poor form.
I did not cut out any quote from Myrrdin. When you quote a quoted post, the initial quote goes missing. I wasn't referencing it and never added it in. You are insinuating I actively removed it. Again, pure bias judgement of me, not as a mod, but as a person. If he wishes to add his comments, I welcome it.
Regarding your reference to a post by lemlin on FSA, I saw it (lunchtime today), I checked to see if you had reported it (just in case you saw something wrong with it but you didn't) and decided it was banter between Swiper and Lemlin. I have no input into how that league runs and who plays who. I don't have access to tables so I do not know who is winning or losing. I'm not sure why you are bringing it up because, again, you never reported it as a problem. No one did.
Good night all.0 -
Hi FG,
All fine by me, no need to continue this back and forth although I have a three final points below I think I should highlight and then I've added all the Feedback I need to.
RE the PM you posted - I'm absolutely fine with you posting this, and yes, I had read that PM a number of times recently when I was trying to figure out what you were referring to. It's clear we were looking for something totally different when you talked about not being able to give 'your side of the story'. Not really the bombshell I was expecting if I'm honest. You threatened us with a one month ban next time we wasted your time. I have no idea why you couldn't have simply said as much on the FF Chat thread rather than alluding to something much worse, but that's beside the point. The fact that you threatened us with a one month ban does not then justify the ban itself, but this is being pedantic. I've no issue with you posting any PM's between us, I've said this from the start. I'm glad that there is not more to this if I'm honest, I had no idea what you had been referring to.
You mention Lemlin came back after his two week ban and 'took it on the chin' - I'm confused as to why you would have expected him to do anything else. He managed to get an initial dig in at me, then half an hour later decided that wasn't enough so dragged up the old thread that caused all the trouble between us in the first place, clearly derailing the RMT thread even further. What could he possibly have to complain about upon his return? We ended up with the same length ban despite me not responding after my initial post and reporting it to you. I imagine he was delighted, and even moreso after seeing me then receive a one month ban immediately after.
RE Lemlins FSA post from yesterday - you say you checked if it was reported. How exactly do I report a post in a forum I'm banned from? The fact you even checked to see if it's reported indicates you also thought it was directed at me. You can take this post as me reporting it if you wish, and action it under the new rules regarding him referring to me, even indirectly.
I have no need to post on this Feedback Thread anymore. This isn't about me, it's about FG and the FSA moderation and I've given my Feedback on both FG and the general moderating as I see it. Despite everything said here I still maintain you do a good job, pretty much single-handedly, on a tough forum. In saying that I think I have been unfairly treated this past year despite making an effort not to bite to Lemlins incessant responding to my posts and little digs. It seems I won't be able to shake my previous history off and it will always put a slant on everything I post there.
I'm unsure why you keep asking Admins to refer to 'our history' in relation to posting in this Feedback thread. I can't speak for anyone else that's posted here but from my point of view - I had Feedback to offer, I asked permission to offer it and then did so in what I hope was a civil manner. I've tried not to make this into a DR thread, I haven't once asked to overturn my bans and have tried to steer the conversation away from specific bans and incidents as much as possible. The reason I mentioned I will not continue to post regularly in FSA is purely down to certain responses I've heard in this thread. Its not a pride thing, and its not to make some grand announcement. The FSA Charter was broken when the posts discussing my ban were allowed stay up. This was one point I really thought FG would accept that he made a mistake, even though I assumed he would follow up that I didn't need to comment on it etc etc. He didn't, so I feel the Forums own Charter was not followed on that occasion. Its a tough decision to stand by.
Admins - if you think I've been out of line with anything I've posted here I'm happy to discuss either on thread or via PM.0 -
Advertisement
-
I just think you need to accept a little better that when people discuss the RoryC/Lemlin thing on the forum, it is because they don't view it half as seriously as you do, and for the rest of us it is just one of those things we view all as tongue in cheek akin to Wenger/Mourinho in real life. In the word of the great Richard Keys, it was just banter.
It is actually genuinely entertaining for the most part that you guys have this little rivalry in that same way as Mourinho/Wenger so it would be better if you could diffuse it a little more to be a bit more tongue in cheek to save yourself, FutureGuy and Lemlin the stress of something that in the end really isn't a serious thing.
I'm pretty sure nobody takes any joy in seeing you banned or wants to mock you over it, so I really don't think there is a need for you to be getting so worked up over the FSA Premier League Roryc/Lemlin Classico derby posts.
As someone who has alot of time for you on the forum, I just think you would have a much better time of it yourself, if you didn't take the whole thing (the forum, not the game, the game is super serious business) so seriously.0 -
That damn turtle must have put an oyster in my soup when I wasn't looking.0
-
-
Mr.Prodston wrote: »My personal opinion is that a Moderator should really not have to do anything other than some administration in a forum in a perfect world i.e close, merge threads, remove spammers and perhaps help guide new posters in a forum. Any poster that goes out of their way to have spats or cause any kind of trouble clearly cannot have much respect for their fellow posters, the moderators who are volunteers and the forum itself. Every time somebody does something against the rules it means that a moderator has to give up their free time to try and solve things. I don't think that's cool if anybody deliberately does something they know to be wrong.
Why should anyone apart from those who don't get along have to put up with such petty bickering? I was very selfish and decided to step down as moderator because I really did not want to have to deal with grown adults involved in a conflict that has absolutely nothing to do with me. There were other reasons I stepped down but if I'm totally honest this formed a part of my thinking. To a certain extent I'm talking about roryc and Lemlin here but not exclusively it's just that their disagreements and how they have been dealt with form a great deal of this feedback. I really like both posters when they're not at each other throats or delicately tickling each other from afar and we have had some great discussions and camaraderie which I hope will continue for a long time to come. Both are exceptional players and provide some fantastic insight but rules need to be adhered to and because of that both are probably exceptionally lucky to not be permabanned in my opinion. It is to FutureGuy's testament that this is not the case. To be fair in my brief time as mod I don't believe there was much hassle if any other than some tit for tat posts being reported. Each post that was reported would be sent to my email and that can get tiresome. I must stress that reporting posts that should be reported is vital and actively encouraged. It is possible to miss things even if they're under your nose. Obviously I was not cut out to be a mod nor have as much patience as I thought That is both a criticism of myself and of abusing the report function.
Excellent post Mr P. To be honest it gives a whole new perspective on things and, like many others, I've never been a mod so it does give a bit of insight into the work put in.
I'll admit myself, there are times I've stood back and thought - you're a 30 year old man, you've two kids, a full time job and alot better things to spend your time on than arguing over Fantasy Football. But then the kids start watching Mickey Mouse Clubhouse again and I'm sitting there with little else to do :pac:
I've requested in the past that RoryC and I were allowed to engage because I think the two of us play the game in very different ways and it's interesting for others to be able to view and value the two opposing views. I do realise now that this has been attempted for long enough without success and I'm happy to go ahead with the guidelines as stated from the 06th September and ignore each other entirely. An awful lot of this thread has boiled down to me and RoryC so hopefully that will end the conflict.
I'd like to reiterate again that I think FutureGuy does a thankless job in a forum which is growing and growing. We've a huge community there and it'll be great for him to have a co-mod. He referred to a user who pmed him in recent months in relation to the way the forum was going and I've no problem saying that was me - at the start of the season I certainly noticed an influx of new users who didn't fit the atmosphere in the forum.
If anything, FutureGuy's past moderation has helped the forum grow into the success it is and helped it grow to a level where another moderator is now a necessity. And my plan is to be one less problem for them moving forward.0 -
bucketybuck wrote: »Is this not pretty much the opposite of whats happening?
I'm not sure I follow. If you care to expand on that I would be happy to read over it and give a response.0 -
I'm not sure I follow. If you care to expand on that I would be happy to read over it and give a response.
You said:However, where Lemlin has accepted this state of affairs and , as far as I can tell, abides by it, you continue to reference Lemlin in your posts. wtf?
Roryc in post 51 provided a number of examples proving his case that it was Lemlin who was continuing to reference Roryc and trying to provoke debate/reaction, whereas Roryc had for almost a year not responded at all to Lemlin until the one oblique reply that immediately earned him a ban.
This is pretty much the opposite of "Lemlin has accepted this state of affairs and, as far as I can tell, abides by it". I'm surprised that this has been overlooked as it seems to be central tenant of Roryc's complaint.
As an observer, I'm still unsure why the two appear to have been treated differently. There are multiple posts showing where Lemlin tried to engage with Roryc, yet Roryc gets an immediate ban for doing the same?0 -
bucketybuck wrote: »You said:
Roryc in post 51 provided a number of examples proving his case that it was Lemlin who was continuing to reference Roryc and trying to provoke debate/reaction, whereas Roryc had for almost a year not responded at all to Lemlin until the one oblique reply that immediately earned him a ban.
This is pretty much the opposite of "Lemlin has accepted this state of affairs and, as far as I can tell, abides by it". I'm surprised that this has been overlooked as it seems to be central tenant of Roryc's complaint.
As an observer, I'm still unsure why the two appear to have been treated differently. There are multiple posts showing where Lemlin tried to engage with Roryc, yet Roryc gets an immediate ban for doing the same?
I'm not going to get into things much as you are referring to someone else, but this has already been covered in detail in many posts above. Rory postes examples where Lemlin discussed things with RoryC in an amicable manner.
Rory did not just engage with Lemlin. He went against my instructions not to bring up old arguments against them as this has derailed countless threads in the past. You can see this in the PM I posted. Massive MASSIVE difference. Lemlin then did the very same and got banned to the same level. I then PM'ed them both of the situation. Then RoryC attacked my decisions as a mod when he returned from the ban, despite having an admin rule in my favour in the previous DRM.
Since Sept 6th, after this debacle, there is an admin-level order for them not to interact in any way with each other. That's where we stand ad of then.0 -
Hi FG,
All fine by me, no need to continue this back and forth although I have a three final points below I think I should highlight and then I've added all the Feedback I need to.
RE the PM you posted - I'm absolutely fine with you posting this, and yes, I had read that PM a number of times recently when I was trying to figure out what you were referring to. It's clear we were looking for something totally different when you talked about not being able to give 'your side of the story'. Not really the bombshell I was expecting if I'm honest. You threatened us with a one month ban next time we wasted your time. I have no idea why you couldn't have simply said as much on the FF Chat thread rather than alluding to something much worse, but that's beside the point. The fact that you threatened us with a one month ban does not then justify the ban itself, but this is being pedantic. I've no issue with you posting any PM's between us, I've said this from the start. I'm glad that there is not more to this if I'm honest, I had no idea what you had been referring to.
You mention Lemlin came back after his two week ban and 'took it on the chin' - I'm confused as to why you would have expected him to do anything else. He managed to get an initial dig in at me, then half an hour later decided that wasn't enough so dragged up the old thread that caused all the trouble between us in the first place, clearly derailing the RMT thread even further. What could he possibly have to complain about upon his return? We ended up with the same length ban despite me not responding after my initial post and reporting it to you. I imagine he was delighted, and even moreso after seeing me then receive a one month ban immediately after.
RE Lemlins FSA post from yesterday - you say you checked if it was reported. How exactly do I report a post in a forum I'm banned from? The fact you even checked to see if it's reported indicates you also thought it was directed at me. You can take this post as me reporting it if you wish, and action it under the new rules regarding him referring to me, even indirectly.
I have no need to post on this Feedback Thread anymore. This isn't about me, it's about FG and the FSA moderation and I've given my Feedback on both FG and the general moderating as I see it. Despite everything said here I still maintain you do a good job, pretty much single-handedly, on a tough forum. In saying that I think I have been unfairly treated this past year despite making an effort not to bite to Lemlins incessant responding to my posts and little digs. It seems I won't be able to shake my previous history off and it will always put a slant on everything I post there.
I'm unsure why you keep asking Admins to refer to 'our history' in relation to posting in this Feedback thread. I can't speak for anyone else that's posted here but from my point of view - I had Feedback to offer, I asked permission to offer it and then did so in what I hope was a civil manner. I've tried not to make this into a DR thread, I haven't once asked to overturn my bans and have tried to steer the conversation away from specific bans and incidents as much as possible. The reason I mentioned I will not continue to post regularly in FSA is purely down to certain responses I've heard in this thread. Its not a pride thing, and its not to make some grand announcement. The FSA Charter was broken when the posts discussing my ban were allowed stay up. This was one point I really thought FG would accept that he made a mistake, even though I assumed he would follow up that I didn't need to comment on it etc etc. He didn't, so I feel the Forums own Charter was not followed on that occasion. Its a tough decision to stand by.
Admins - if you think I've been out of line with anything I've posted here I'm happy to discuss either on thread or via PM.
RoryC,
Just to make something very clear here before I draw a line under my responses to your feedback.
You have stated a few times that you do not want to see me leave as mod of FSA. Your post in the second DRM says the opposite.
"I’m clearly not the only one that has an issue with his heavy handed modding, and there are a number of other posters that would seem to be much better suited to the job"
So please do not tell everyone you just want another mod. You wanted me gone.
Your posts on the DRMs painted a picture of disarray in FSA, where a vindictive, bias and vengeful mod is driving people out. The FACTS are that I have modded in accordance with boards.ie rules and three posters who received warnings/bans have taken issue to the fact I banned them and have decided to to post again.
So after reading all your posts and all your points, I feel there is absolutely nothing left for me to comment on here. You have stated here and on the DRMs that I am biased, unfair and heavy handed mod and you have presented your case.
I will let the mods decide what to do with it now.
Regardless of what happens, it's clear that you will never accept the fact that I am not out to get you so if you decide not to post on FSA again after your current ban has expired I will not like it as you are a great contributor but I won't lose a second of sleep because I have shot down every single claim against me from you.
Regards,
Tony0 -
Admins,
I have taken on board the claims by Rory C that I am an unfair, biased and heavy handed mod and added my side. It looks like both of us are done. I will let the case in your hands.
Therefore I would like to return to the other two posters who have made some pretty serious allegations towards me as a mod of FSA.
Danger781, you apologised and said that "I may have been a bit harsh / offensive towards you in the opening post". You also stated that you might try to get in a decent repsonse soon. Are you going to fully retract the comments against me or will you be providing further evidence to support your claims?
Mr. Incognito, we are still awaiting your proof to back up the serious claims against me here and in your DRM, including that I am allowing bullying on boards.ie, the largest internet forum in the country accessed my a huge number of people. As I said, I am not letting that particular one slide so I expect a full response to this from you.
Right now, for all the accusations put against me from all three persons here, persons who have all posted DRMs to complain about me personally as a mod, it is my belief that, after all the talk both here and on the DRM, there is not a shred of evidence to back up any of the claims held against me.
Yes, there is a clear need for more mods, something that has been in the works for sometime before the feedback thread was started.
I will await the responses of the two posters above.
Futureguy0 -
Advertisement
-
Didn't arrive home yesterday until very late. Made dinner, sat down for a bit, then went to bed.
Should be able to come up with some sort of response today. I'll try to keep it short and sweet.
One quick point before I get back to work: My OP seemed like an unfair attack on you in a biased manner. I understand completely how it came across that way, but it was not my intention. I got caught up in the moment of it all. The main point I was trying to make is that I feel you are overly strict in following the charter, and too quick to hand out cards. Clearly my OP didn't get that across. Every action you've made can easily be argued to be in line with the rules layed out in the charter. However, they are not necessarily in the best interest of the community. I should have left my emotions at the door in the OP.
When I get home from work I will try to put together a response to summarise everything. If the thread is closed in the mean time I will just PM you. I understand the thread has gathered quite an audience (Some of whom I have never once seen post in FSA) so if this results in closure so be it.
Regards,
Luke0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement