Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Issue with Soccer Forum

12467

Comments

  • #152
    Knex*
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,477 ✭✭✭✭Knex*


    Yeah, if we could get Lloyd's post above sorted, I think we'd accept closing this matter off until the Feedback thread is created prior to the World Cup.

    I think we know that we can't asses every gripe and issue brought forth right now.


  • #153
    googled eyes
    Registered Users Posts: 4,629 ✭✭✭googled eyes


    I have to agree that although not mentioned in the OP the fact that a group on the members of the LFC thread cannot refer to themselves as " Match thread saps " is pushing things.

    Who is offended if Knex or OwayneOTT call each other saps ? They're certainly not.

    I read the LFC thread for a long time before I joined the Soccer Forum and I like anyone else could see that the humour in the thread can be fairly surreal but for the most part, the members of the thread enjoy the humour.

    Whats wrong with a group of like minded individuals giving themselves a funny little name.
    After all that's all it was. A funny little name that a group of "friends" decided to call themselves.

    Also people claiming that the .gifs and "saps " thing is clannish and clique forming. What the hell do you think that terrace songs are ?


  • #154
    Alfred Borden
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,012 ✭✭✭✭Alfred Borden


    Maybe each club should be given an off topic thread?


  • #155
    Nuri Sahin
    Site Banned Posts: 26,456 ✭✭✭✭Nuri Sahin


    Beasty wrote: »
    OK to clear this one up I deleted the Mod's post. I also carded him for that post. I did not consider it appropriate to leave what was essentially a bad example to others up in thread. I would add that going back the the match thread that kicked all this off, getting on for 50 posts have been deleted by the local mods. While sometimes it may be appropriate to leave such posts up to show others what is not acceptable, they also can destroy the flow of a thread. Whether posts are deleted or left up is generally a mod discretion issue, but in my view is most certainly not a "major" issue

    Sorry, but given what happened earlier in the day to myself and perhaps others, this just screams protect the moderator. A bad example? Pfft. If you's really want to show there was no bias in play, you'd have infracted him and left the post up instead of deleting it.

    In saying that, and Gav knows how I feel about it given our discussion via PM last night, I don't believe he should be warned/yellow carded. Some context applied is needed which many moderators across the board are incapable of factoring in. He's ripping on his own team's player. Sure, yesterday's game if someone said he played like a prat/idiot/eejit, I wouldn't have batted an eyelid given the context of the comment and poster history.

    If you're going to make the word prat yellow card warning, you have to make the word idiot and eejit a yellow card warning offence too from here on in, otherwise everything I've said about my one warning and in turn ban for a culmination of yellow cards is spot on. Trigger happy modding. I'd argue it was more than that, it was calculated and seen as a chance of getting rid of me, despite there being far and away worse posters who add nothing to the soccer forum in terms of constructive football discussion whatsoever. Sure, one or two have already posted here.

    Looking further elsewhere, I just searched the word scum and scumbag this morning. There are over 1300+ and 1500+ examples of the words being used respectively in the soccer forum. I challenged the moderator to check it out and asked him why have so many people got away with calling x player scum/scumbag, only for him to ramble on about me having to giving him examples at the time when a 5 second search via the search feature could show him everything, all the while knowing full well me being banned I can't see the forum without signing offline which is hassle for me, before proceeding to give some woeful, and I have little doubt insincere blessing on my future as a poster off this site and my team (Liverpool) winning yesterday.

    It's not just the soccer forum though. Have a look at the Spurs Supporters forum where calling Chelsea - Chelski and using the terms scum/scumbag is allowed, if not worse words. I realise the Spurs Supporters forum might be a grey area, but it's under the same topic as far as I am concerned.
    Given his posting history in general, and with regards to the word he used, I find it farcical Luckycharms was given a yellow card for using the word once.
    But then again, very much unsurprising given the nature of modding towards Liverpool fans in general.

    The soccer forum - where calling someone a footballer a prat (idiot) for missing a very simple chance is a warning offence, all the while having sly digs at Hillsborough are mostly, if not totally ignored.


  • #156
    Knex*
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,477 ✭✭✭✭Knex*


    Raf32 wrote: »
    Maybe each club should be given an off topic thread?

    Ah no, that would be insane. The main threads has leeway with that, whereas match threads, understandably, don't.

    It would be stripping the character from the Super Thread, anyway.


  • Advertisement
  • #157
    RasTa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,116 ✭✭✭✭RasTa


    Knex. wrote: »
    This interests plenty more than just Liverpool fans on this forum, and there are United supporters already contributing constructively to the thread.

    Perhaps rather than guessing, you could read the thread and contribute in a helpful manner, as did they?

    There is nothing more to contribute tbh, the mods have already said nobody got a warning for posting a panda in the superthreads and spamming matchday threads with silly images is not on.


  • #158
    Nuri Sahin
    Site Banned Posts: 26,456 ✭✭✭✭Nuri Sahin


    Raf32 wrote: »
    Maybe each club should be given an off topic thread?

    Nah. Some common sense should be applied from the moderators, and the posters who don't like the off topic talk should learn how to use the ignore function instead of crying about it as the vast majority of it is harmless. What's amusing about the off topic talk, at least in terms of the Liverpool thread is that the one or two fellow supporters who are complaining about it, their contribution to the Liverpool thread next to none, and there is a clear disdain from their end at a core of regular Liverpool supporters in the thread.


  • #159
    Knex*
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,477 ✭✭✭✭Knex*


    RasTa wrote: »
    There is nothing more to contribute tbh, the mods have already said nobody got a warning for posting a panda in the superthreads and spamming matchday threads with silly images is not on.

    The issue that the thread was opened for has still clearly not been dealt with.


  • #160
    RasTa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,116 ✭✭✭✭RasTa


    Although I will say that OPR getting perm banned is a joke.

    It has nothing to do with his posting history or style, count his yellow cards and I'm sure there won't be many.

    The real reason is whatever mod doesn't like him and he is abusing his power to get him banned which has happened in the past with mods.


  • #161
    LuckyLloyd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,401 ✭✭✭✭LuckyLloyd


    RasTa wrote: »
    There is nothing more to contribute tbh, the mods have already said nobody got a warning for posting a panda in the superthreads and spamming matchday threads with silly images is not on.

    That doesn't work though. You can't issue this warning while deleting a panda gif:
    Thanx 4 The Fish wrote: »

    [Mod Hat]
    Feel free, that will get you an infraction though.

    Cut out the Pandas, was on the match thread, same rule applies.
    [/Mod Hat]

    And then say 'oh but no-one has got warned or banned for posting Panda gifs' as if that resolves the matter.

    - the warning above either applies or it doesn't;
    - if it doesn't we need a clear understanding of why it doesn't while other off topic gifs and images can be posted;

    You can't have this bizarre position of:

    - we say don't post Panda gifs;
    - if you post Panda gifs we aren't banning you for that, it's because you failed to follow a moderator's instructions which is long term sitewide policy, etc;

    It's a crude form of have your cake and eat it too modding.


  • Advertisement
  • #162
    Will I Amnt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,222 ✭✭✭✭Will I Amnt


    RasTa wrote: »
    Although I will say that OPR getting perm banned is a joke.

    It has nothing to do with his posting history or style, count his yellow cards and I'm sure there won't be many.

    The real reason is whatever mod doesn't like him and he is abusing his power to get him banned which has happened in the past with mods.

    He called a mod a w*nker in a PM apparently. Standard 1 month ban afaik.


  • #163
    Blatter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,832 ✭✭✭✭Blatter


    Opr permabanned?

    Sweet Jesus.


  • #164
    LuckyLloyd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,401 ✭✭✭✭LuckyLloyd


    RasTa wrote: »
    Although I will say that OPR getting perm banned is a joke.

    It has nothing to do with his posting history or style, count his yellow cards and I'm sure there won't be many.

    Unfortunately, it is inappropriate to talk about that here but it would seem mad that his fine long term contribution to the soccer forum wouldn't be considered and heavily weighed in terms of making a decision on whether to permenantly ban him from the forum no matter what he said to who in the heat of the moment on a specific disagreement.


  • #165
    RasTa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,116 ✭✭✭✭RasTa


    Will I Amnt wrote: »
    He called a mod a w*nker in a PM apparently. Standard 1 month ban afaik.

    He got perm banned from soccer for it.

    Clear abuse of mod powers giving what it takes to get a perm ban usually.


  • #166
    Chazz Michael Michaels
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,822 ✭✭✭Chazz Michael Michaels


    Given that soccer fans tend to consume alcohol before and during matches, is it surprising that threads get heated, and, mods might make rash decisions?

    Just a theory.


  • #167
    Will I Amnt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,222 ✭✭✭✭Will I Amnt


    RasTa wrote: »
    He got perm banned from soccer for it.

    Clear abuse of mod powers giving what it takes to get a perm ban usually.

    Oh right. I wasn't aware of that. That's a bit ridiculous in fairness.


  • #168
    Knex*
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,477 ✭✭✭✭Knex*


    Chazz Michael Michaels wrote: »
    Given that soccer fans tend to consume alcohol before and during matches, is it surprising that threads get heated, and, mods might make rash decisions?

    Just a theory.

    The fans drinking are rarely the problem :D

    The match thread was closed on a Friday, for one thing. Game was on Sunday.


  • #169
    Chazz Michael Michaels
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,822 ✭✭✭Chazz Michael Michaels


    Knex. wrote: »
    The fans drinking are rarely the problem :D

    The match thread was closed on a Friday, for one thing. Game was on Sunday.

    LOL


  • #170
    Nuri Sahin
    Site Banned Posts: 26,456 ✭✭✭✭Nuri Sahin


    RasTa wrote: »
    Although I will say that OPR getting perm banned is a joke.

    It has nothing to do with his posting history or style, count his yellow cards and I'm sure there won't be many.

    The real reason is whatever mod doesn't like him and he is abusing his power to get him banned which has happened in the past with mods.

    It's the not the first time the moderator who I assume you're talking about is being called up on his behaviour. I know from being friendly with a few of the regulars in the gambling thread back when I was moderator, he was complained about quite a bit.In saying that, there's more than a single agenda driven moderator, be it relation to club or individual posters across the site, let alone the soccer forum.

    Some moderators are lazy and just want a bolded name tag, others will cling to their positions of power. Sometimes both go hand in hand. Others will play politics. A large part of the reason I stepped down from modding my three forums was because of that crap. I had asked for help a few times on one or two of the forums, it took so long to come by that I grew weary of the role and needed a break entirely. That was just the tipping point though.


  • #171
    RasTa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,116 ✭✭✭✭RasTa


    fwiw I've no idea who the mod is nor should it matter but in order to get a perm ban do all the mods have to agree?


  • Advertisement
  • #172
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,534 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    RasTa wrote: »
    He got perm banned from soccer for it.

    Clear abuse of mod powers giving what it takes to get a perm ban usually.
    I did the banning (as is perfectly clear from the resultant appeal thread) and anyone attempting to do anything like that again will face the same treatment. I will not stand for posters hurling abuse at (in this case 2) mods (not that this appears in any way relevant to this thread)


  • #173
    RasTa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,116 ✭✭✭✭RasTa


    Beasty wrote: »
    I did the banning and anyone attempting to do anything like that again will face the same treatment. I will not stand for posters hurling abuse at (in this case 2) mods

    Thought it was you alright.

    Define hurling abuse? Also why it warrants a perm ban? Did you confirm with the mods if that is what they would like to happen or you made the decision by yourself?


  • #174
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,534 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    RasTa wrote: »
    Thought it was you alright.

    Define hurling abuse? Also why it warrants a perm ban? Did you confirm with the mods if that is what they would like to happen or you made the decision by yourself?
    I advised the local mods what I intended doing. Read the dispute thread if you need to know more (which included an explanation of how the poster could have potentially regained access after a lengthy ban)


  • #175
    Knex*
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,477 ✭✭✭✭Knex*


    Out of interest, if in his intial post, Opr had told me to **** off, rather than a moderator, would he still have received a red?

    Perhaps that would have been the case, but if not, its a slippery slope if dealing with mods results in heavier actions than a "regular" poster.


  • #176
    knucklehead6
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,840 ✭✭✭knucklehead6


    Knex. wrote: »
    Out of interest, if in his intial post, Opr had told me to **** off, rather than a moderator, would he still have received a red?

    Perhaps that would have been the case, but if not, its a slippery slope if dealing with mods results in heavier actions than a "regular" poster.


    Ah in fairness dealing with a mod SHOULD have higher consequences.

    They're the ones giving up their free time to help run this place.

    Dealing with me in the soccer forum, and telling me to fupp off is fine, cos i'm just a regular user. Dealing with me in the forum i moderate and telling me to fupp off is going to result in a banning.


  • #177
    Knex*
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,477 ✭✭✭✭Knex*


    knucklehead6 wrote: »
    Ah in fairness dealing with a mod SHOULD have higher consequences.

    They're the ones giving up their free time to help run this place.

    Dealing with me in the soccer forum, and telling me to fupp off is fine, cos i'm just a regular user. Dealing with me in the forum i moderate and telling me to fupp off is going to result in a banning.

    Yeah, in hindsight, that's fair.

    I suppose it was more the context of Opr's post where he preempted a good point with that, that made it seem less aggressive to me, I suppose. I expected him to get a yellow, not so much a red, considering his posting history. What he did after, by the sounds of things, over PM is fairly inexcusable however.


  • #178
    RasTa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,116 ✭✭✭✭RasTa


    Beasty wrote: »
    I advised the local mods what I intended doing. Read the dispute thread if you need to know more (which included an explanation of how the poster could have potentially regained access after a lengthy ban)

    Yeah read it there. Not sure why it being in PM made it so harsh of a banning.

    I could go into the soccer form and call a mod a wanker and **** off after an on thread warning and still be posting as I need 3 yellows I think to get a 2 week ban.

    Don't get all the outrage over something said via PM compared to on the forums.


  • #179
    Chazz Michael Michaels
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,822 ✭✭✭Chazz Michael Michaels


    Knex. wrote: »
    Out of interest, if in his intial post, Opr had told me to **** off, rather than a moderator, would he still have received a red?

    Perhaps that would have been the case, but if not, its a slippery slope if dealing with mods results in heavier actions than a "regular" poster.

    As far as I can tell, mods are effectively untouchable and rarely have their actions seriously reviewed, and will always back each other in the DRP forum, no matter what. Unless they do something horrendously bad, like seriously abuse their position.

    But that's for another thread...


  • #180
    Chazz Michael Michaels
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,822 ✭✭✭Chazz Michael Michaels


    RasTa wrote: »
    Yeah read it there. Not sure why it being in PM made it so harsh of a banning.

    I could go into the soccer form and call a mod a wanker and **** off after an on thread warning and still be posting as I need 3 yellows I think to get a 2 week ban.

    Don't get all the outrage over something said via PM compared to on the forums.

    I don't see why they should take personal abuse. Even when they're wrong.


  • Advertisement
  • #181
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 8,647 ✭ [Deleted User]


    What is the panda.thing about? That they lay around and eat **** all day without consequence...... Like Liverpool fans???


  • #182
    RasTa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,116 ✭✭✭✭RasTa


    Chazz Michael Michaels wrote: »
    I don't see why they should take personal abuse. Even when they're wrong.

    I hate that term personal abuse, can hardly be implied in this situation if the only words used were wanker and f off.

    If you look at an old poster Melion, I remember reading one of his appeals and it turned out he had 56 infractions and 7 red's on the whole site and he still wasn't perm banned from the soccer form.

    6 months or perm without considering their posting history is too harsh imo.


  • #183
    googled eyes
    Registered Users Posts: 4,629 ✭✭✭googled eyes


    Deleted User wrote: »
    What is the panda.thing about? That they lay around and eat **** all day without consequence...... Like Liverpool fans???

    Why?


  • #184
    Knex*
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,477 ✭✭✭✭Knex*


    RasTa wrote: »
    I hate that term personal abuse, can hardly be implied in this situation if the only words used were wanker and f off.

    If you look at an old poster Melion, I remember reading one of his appeals and it turned out he had 56 infractions and 7 red's on the whole site and he still wasn't perm banned from the soccer form.

    6 months or perm without considering their posting history is too harsh imo.

    Mother of Christ. That's horrendous.


  • #185
    Will I Amnt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,222 ✭✭✭✭Will I Amnt


    And Melion wasn't even that bad :pac:
    He learned from his mistakes and was a decent enough poster for a long time before his ban.


  • #186
    Lovely Bloke
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,748 ✭✭✭✭Lovely Bloke


    Lads, it's sitewide policy that abusing mods is a total no-no - whatever way you frame it, calling a mod a wanker is going to result in sanctions, squeaky clean previous or not. Doesn't matter who the mod is, doesn't matter who the poster is - long term posters should actually know better than to resort to that kind of thing anyway, and actually deserve less leniency than newer posters really.

    On to the topic at hand, in-jokes in the team superthread, fine. In-jokes in match threads are extremely annoying, and not long ago an in-joke (again with Liverpool fans) ruined a match thread for me (Man U vs Bayern First Leg, Pool supporters going on and on about some comment someone once made about Sturridge - in a thread that wasn't even about Liverpool, when they were called on it by posters (AFTER mods chose to ignore reported posts re: same), a warning was put on the thread to pretty much protect the same Pool fans, bizarre situation).

    Anyway, there seems to have been a warning put on the superthread about posting pandas, that needs to be clarified, but asking for that is probably going to be seen as "hectoring" the mods, which is the usual MO of feedback - stop asking mods/CMods/Admins questions they don't want to answer, if the feel like answering they will, but they are not obliged to and they can just mod as they please, do what they want and aren't answerable to any pleb normal users. Ask the question enough times and it's a decent excuse for some Admin to pop in and close the thread because it's "not going anywhere".

    It's clear, mods can do what they want, circle the wagons and just ride the thread out until an Admin closes it, no questions answered, no feedback taken on board, and everyone can just eff off really.


  • Advertisement
  • #187
    LuckyLloyd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,401 ✭✭✭✭LuckyLloyd


    Baldy Conscience wrote: »
    Anyway, there seems to have been a warning put on the superthread about posting pandas, that needs to be clarified, but asking for that is probably going to be seen as "hectoring" the mods, which is the usual MO of feedback - stop asking mods/CMods/Admins questions they don't want to answer, if the feel like answering they will, but they are not obliged to and they can just mod as they please, do what they want and aren't answerable to any pleb normal users. Ask the question enough times and it's a decent excuse for some Admin to pop in and close the thread because it's "not going anywhere".

    It's clear, mods can do what they want, circle the wagons and just ride the thread out until an Admin closes it, no questions answered, no feedback taken on board, and everyone can just eff off really.

    Well I have tried to make the question at core for starting this thread clear and highlighted what needs to be clarified a couple of times. The lack of a clear response is disappointing, but hopefully dfx or T4TF or whoever will get off work or whatever this evening and allow this to get wrapped up.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=89927603&postcount=129
    LuckyLloyd wrote: »
    Here's what I am gleaning from your responses:

    - there is a section in the charter that covers the mod team for ruling out of bounds off topic .gifs;
    - this will be decided on an adhoc basis and from time to time some picture or gif posting will be adjudged as not allowed (though other similar usage is okay);
    - when a mod or mods have made that adhoc decision they will post an on thread warning;
    - failure to comply (i.e. to continue posting images) or any questioning of that warning will result in warnings, etc;
    - in such a case, the warnings, etc will be technically for back seat modding or refusing to follow a moderators instructions, not the gif rule;

    Is that correct?

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=89930841&postcount=151

    LuckyLloyd wrote: »
    Great post Sacksian. I agree that the forum is well modded overall.

    I would find it acceptable for:

    - TRTF to confirm that the warning from last night does not mean panda gifs (or whatever images people find humorous) are out of bounds within the superthread;
    - with the usual caveat that those images cannot be NSFW or constitute abuse of a poster or player in such a way that it contravenes those sections of the charter;

    And we can move on problem solved.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=89931238&postcount=161
    LuckyLloyd wrote: »
    That doesn't work though. You can't issue this warning while deleting a panda gif:



    And then say 'oh but no-one has got warned or banned for posting Panda gifs' as if that resolves the matter.

    - the warning above either applies or it doesn't;
    - if it doesn't we need a clear understanding of why it doesn't while other off topic gifs and images can be posted;

    You can't have this bizarre position of:

    - we say don't post Panda gifs;
    - if you post Panda gifs we aren't banning you for that, it's because you failed to follow a moderator's instructions which is long term sitewide policy, etc;

    It's a crude form of have your cake and eat it too modding.


  • #188
    Agueroooo
    Site Banned Posts: 4,925 ✭✭✭Agueroooo


    Sacksian wrote: »
    I read the Soccer forum daily. I don't post there and don't have access but, despite what a lot of the posters seem to think, it seems to be a really well-moderated forum (especially given the personalities involved).

    As a non-partisan reader, it's really entertaining to watch the ebbs and flows of each superthread during the season - and from season to season - as the various clubs rise and fall.

    This year, it's the Manchester United superthread's turn to endure what Liverpool's superthread has had for the past few seasons (and Arsenal are next, I'd imagine): bitter feuds between the optimists and the arch-pessimists over just how awful various players, managers and administrators are and all of it fuelled by healthy doses of hearsay, conjecture and prejudice. In other words, good old-fashioned football debates.

    Right now, given their history and the last few seasons (and even the prelude to this one), I can't imagine there's any feeling better than being a Liverpool fan.

    If I had been a Liverpool fan discussing my team with fellow supporters this past week, I can imagine I would have been beyond delirious. Humour (often surreal humour) is an inextricable part of football culture. As such, and in the context and culture of internet discussion (i.e. animal memes, aimated GIFS, etc), I cannot think of anything more on-topic to a Liverpool superthread than Pandas. It's fans getting giddy with fellow supporters in their own thread.

    Generally, the soccer forum mods are excellent. This was a mistake. No big deal. Undo it and move on.

    excellent post!

    and put across better than I could ever imagine.

    Other news...

    Can someone clarify if Opr is perma banned or has it been downgraded (fingers crossed) to one month? as the disputes thread is a bit confusing.


  • #189
    keane2097
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,775 ✭✭✭✭keane2097


    Why doesn't someone just post a panda gif in the thread and see what happens? Would be more productive than trying to get one of the mods to answer the question without equivocation by the way this has gone to date.


  • #190
    brevity
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,587 ✭✭✭brevity


    keane2097 wrote: »
    Why doesn't someone just post a panda gif in the thread and see what happens? Would be more productive than trying to get one of the mods to answer the question without equivocation by the way this has gone to date.

    I nominate keane2097.

    All in favour?


  • #191
    Agueroooo
    Site Banned Posts: 4,925 ✭✭✭Agueroooo


    brevity wrote: »
    I nominate keane2097.

    All in favour?

    *really wants to post a pic of a Panda with hand up


  • Advertisement
  • #192
    Grayditch
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,347 ✭✭✭✭Grayditch


    Telling a mod to F off should hold no stronger punishment than if it were directed to a regular user.

    I mean, in not sure if it even does, I'm just responding to people who seem to think it's like talking to a Guard or something.

    Fair play to the ones the give up their time and do it properly and not drop those patroning warnings, only to be backpatted with thanks from other mods. So cringy.


  • #193
    GavRedKing
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 53,262 ✭✭✭✭GavRedKing


    Agueroooo wrote: »
    excellent post!

    and put across better than I could ever imagine.

    Other news...

    Can someone clarify if Opr is perma banned or has it been downgraded (fingers crossed) to one month? as the disputes thread is a bit confusing.

    opr's ban was a site ban for abuse via PM which is a Boards standard 1 month.

    Hes serving a permanent ban for the SF forum which will be reviewed in 6 months as Beasty said on the DRP


  • #194
    Knex*
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,477 ✭✭✭✭Knex*


    Lads, be honest with us, are we ever getting a proper answer to the questions Lloyd has put forward, at least? Or are we just pissing into the wind here?

    I'd like to think we're not wasting time, but I'm a cynical man at heart.


  • #195
    Pro. F
    Registered Users Posts: 12,219 ✭✭✭✭Pro. F


    Knex. wrote: »
    Everyone agrees the panda thing in the match thread was fair, if perhaps the method of dealing with it was a little excessive.

    The sap thing was a moderation mistake. It had no business being put in the mod note and then being used as a means to card people. The fact that people still have infractions to their name because of this, is a blot on said mod's copybook, really.

    I honestly can't get over that we are having this discussion. Bizarre doesn't do it justice.

    Deleting posts without any warning or notification, and then following this up with infractions in the Superthread was also surely less than fair.

    To be fair, that was an extremely understandable mistake. Dfx was dealing with a mess of a match thread very late at night. He picked out all the things he saw that looked like trouble, warned against them and then warned against debating his modding on thread. Then some people debated his modding on thread straight after and he carded them. That course of events seems reasonable to me when you consider how much reading and deciding the mod had to do in a short space of time late at night.

    I would guess that on another night somebody would have PM'd Dfx about the "saps" thing instead of arguing in the thread and the use of the term would have, one way or another, returned to the team thread with no real problem for anybody.

    I think Lloyd was right to concentrate this thread on the Panda .gifs, that ruling is far more obviously unreasonable because it has been brought directly into the team super thread and the panda .gifs are so clearly harmless.


  • #196
    Knex*
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,477 ✭✭✭✭Knex*


    Pro. F wrote: »
    To be fair, that was an extremely understandable mistake. Dfx was dealing with a mess of a match thread very late at night. He picked out all the things he saw that looked like trouble, warned against them and then warned against debating his modding on thread. Then some people debated his modding on thread straight after and he carded them. That course of events seems reasonable to me when you consider how much reading and deciding the mod had to do in a short space of time late at night.

    I would guess that on another night somebody would have PM'd Dfx about the "saps" thing instead of arguing in the thread and the use of the term would have, one way or another, returned to the team thread with no real problem for anybody.

    I think Lloyd was right to concentrate this thread on the Panda .gifs, that ruling is far more obviously unreasonable because it has been brought directly into the team super thread and the panda .gifs are so clearly harmless.

    I actually had a few PMs with Bounty Hunter, from whom I got the card, whereby I stated pretty much that and I accepted my card, no issue.

    Still though, we're left now with the impression that we can't even use it on our own thread for fear of infractions, and that's ridiculous.

    Its all the same issue really, Mods put something ridiculous in bold, nobody actually gets carded for doing it, but we get cards for the site wide, "questioning moderation" thing, as they know its not plausible to give a card for the actual content alone. One incident is T4TF warning in the thread yesterday, the other was one part of dfx's warning in the match thread.

    It needs to be cleared up along with the gif issue. I can't see how either could ever be plausibly banned from the super thread, really. I also don't see how the sap reference could ever be banned from any Liverpool match thread, as that is where its most relevant.


  • #197
    K-9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Baldy Conscience wrote: »
    (AFTER mods chose to ignore reported posts re: same), a warning was put on the thread to pretty much protect the same Pool fans, bizarre situation).

    From my experience of modding Politics and AH, me or another mod making a call from a perceived biased view point wouldn't be long getting pulled up on, if/when it happened. Mods often have disagreements in their internal modding forums about issues, we aren't all robots, and my experience of modding busy forums is that the best interest of the forum is the paramount concern of mods.

    Some Soccer fans can be very biased and to be frank, a bit paranoid about opposition fans getting away with this and that, its the nature of the tribal beast!

    Just on opr, we've had our heated debates in the past, never found him abusive or a waste of time type poster. The abuse seems to have come from genuine frustration at the issue. I'd like to think in my own modding I'd give a bit of leeway with a poster like that, and maybe in a day or 2 when heads are calmer we'd come to an agreement, and reduce the term as a gesture of goodwill and giving the poster the benefit of the doubt because of his long term record.

    Good posters will appreciate the thought and consideration, others well, they'll end up with long or perma bans in the end anyway!

    Obviously as a Liverpool fan (sorry for the in joke) I'm a bit biased, but carrying the rule from a match thread over to the super thread seems a bit overkill. The point about WWE/WWF is a good one, its hard to refute the logic tbh, and I don't get wrestling references at all! There's an in joke about Kate Cohen that's nearly 2 years old at this stage and still gets referenced regularly!

    LiamO mentioned it and the thought crept into my mind before seeing his post, bans from specific team match threads that carry over for the rest of the season would do no harm at all. Wouldn't be that hard to keep a record of it, I'd say it would only concern maybe 7/8 posters at most anyway. It removes what seems to be a big reason that those select posters use the forum for.

    As John Cleese said: "How much do you hate the Romans?"

    Peasant: "A Lot."

    "Your in then".

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • #198
    K-9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Oh the Sap thing seems very harsh, hell its a joke taking the piss out of us sad baxtards who post in match threads while watching the match! If we can't take the piss out of ourselves it doesn't say much for the oft quoted "banter" in the soccer forum.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • #199
    Blatter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,832 ✭✭✭✭Blatter


    K-9 wrote: »

    Just on opr, we've had our heated debates in the past, never found him abusive or a waste of time type poster. The abuse seems to have come from genuine frustration at the issue. I'd like to think in my own modding I'd give a bit of leeway with a poster like that, and maybe in a day or 2 when heads are calmer we'd come to an agreement, and reduce the term as a gesture of goodwill and giving the poster the benefit of the doubt because of his long term record.

    Good posters will appreciate the thought and consideration, others well, they'll end up with long or perma bans in the end anyway!

    I'd like to hear the opinions of the soccer mods on this.

    I can't imagine that many of them would disagree. It'd be nonsensical if a reasonable compromise can't be reached in this situation instead of a 6 month blanket ban before anything can be discussed.


  • #200
    GavRedKing
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 53,262 ✭✭✭✭GavRedKing


    Knex. wrote: »
    Lads, be honest with us, are we ever getting a proper answer to the questions Lloyd has put forward, at least? Or are we just pissing into the wind here?

    I'd like to think we're not wasting time, but I'm a cynical man at heart.

    I know i said last night about 12.30/1 to Beasty that i was going to leave it until tomorrow to get an answer together and I'll go back to the mod team and Beasty this afternoon at work and try get an answer to LL's points in due course this evening.

    I'm in and out of training courses all day in work so its hard enough to take a detailed look at whats being mentioned in a quick moving thread and last night I didnt see the Feedback thread until fairly late.


  • #201
    LiamoSail
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,294 ✭✭✭LiamoSail


    OPR reacted wrongly, but surely a poster of 10 years who's contribution has been largely positive can be forgiven for an over reaction to what was a strange decision by the mods.

    The line about him having to prove he can behave in the future was bad form too IMO. Do the previous ten years not demonstrate that?


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement