Banned from the sf

Headshot

Here's my story

Im banned from the sf as of last night. I was supposed to be banned in April when I got my 6th card which was wrong but ill go into detail about that after. Thanx 4 The Fish banned me and if you read Archimedes feedback thread you would see alot of posters arent happy with his modding. Even before my banning I wasnt happy with his modding

About my 6th card, before I got infracted I was dealt with on the thread by another mod, I got an on thread warning and the mod closed the thread. A Few hours later I got an infraction by Thanx 4 The Fish.

The infraction was for

Breach of Forum Charter

is in breach of the forum charter. If you have an issue with a user being a re-reg etc then report to the admins but do not take the law into your own hands.

this what caused it

just SOTS/lockie/bay/who gives a ****/no it's not great your back/ etc seeing stuff again

our old friend sots returns

anyway I dont particular like sots because of his pms to me so he rubbed me up the wrong way. plus he has been called bayview lockie numerous times in the sf, I saw no harm on it

The mod closed the thread and gave me on thread warning and I acknowledged I was wrong by thanking his post. But a few hours later Thanx 4 The Fish sent me an infraction. I tried to argue the point but i hate hassle so i gave up and took it on the chin.

the mod who closed the thread told me

Tbh I'm a bit annoyed cause I felt like I had dealt with the thread but someone decided to go over my hand and hand out the infraction

Thanx 4 The Fish intentionally went over a fellow long serving mod to give me an infraction for a post which was hardly worth one. I felt it was extremely harsh

Unknown to me I should of been banned by then but I was still alive and well and 2 months later I got my 7th which I would still argue wasnt justified but my main point is that 6th card. If i was banned right then and there I would have a better chance of appealing my ban than I do now.

I dont have to repeat what has been said in the Archimedes feedback thread about Thanx 4 The Fish as a mod.

, willingness to single me out and hes so willing, he will go over a fellow mods head, you cant ignore that admins

also I would like to discuss another infraction I got

Dear Headshot,

You have received a warning at boards.ie.

Reason:

---

Breach of Forum Charter

Mr Alan post
that just says what i said? that Utd had an interest in him, no mention of a bid or anything like that

headshot post
Alan why dont you google your self ffs

lazy bum

seriously is that worth an infraction, how the hell is worth an infraction. I just cant get my head around this. It was supposed to be joke because alan tends to never look up google himself

I just feel it was very harsh infraction by TFTF again and even another mod felt it was too

I would like to discuss this with Gordan if its possible

oh
I apologies for my post if they're errors in there, my typing isnt the best and i hate capitals :pac:

ive edited my post about the utd fan bit because its impossible to prove

bonkey

EditI've just seen you'd like Gordon to look at this. I'll check with him before responding

Headshot

bonkey wrote: »

EditI've just seen you'd like Gordon to look at this. I'll check with him before responding

he told me to follow the chains of demand, mods, cmods and then helpdesk

iv contacted the cmods so we'll see what happens

but thanks for the reply

bonkey

Headshot wrote: »

he told me to follow the chains of demand, mods, cmods and then helpdesk

iv contacted the cmods so we'll see what happens

but thanks for the reply

No worries.

If you don't hear from the CMods, or aren't happy with the outcome, come back and let me know. I've left your other post unapproved for the moment, pending the outcome with the CMods. Hope that's ok with you.

(BTW...I know you asked for Gordon, but you'll have to make do with me for now)

Headshot

I hope Bonkey makes this my 2nd post

just read sparks post in that feedback thread and he's dead right. I should of followed DRP, im not a fan of it one bit but its there for mean time so it should be followed, so I apologies for going from 1st step straight to 3rd

Headshot

bonkey can you open this thread please, I dont have time for a cmod that thinks a lazy bum is worth an infraction and cant tell what harmless banter is, so im not going to bother talking to them anymore

this is the problem with having cmods who dont know what the poster is like and probably doesnt follow soccer themselves.

Sparks

I went back through your eleven most recent infractions in the Soccer forum. All were violations of the charter as written. As such, I don't see grounds to overturn them.

As to moderator bias, those eleven infractions didn't come from any one moderator more than any other, they were split reasonably evenly between six soccer mods, between 1 and 3 infractions apiece, and more than one with three. Your five bans from the Soccer forum over the past year likewise were split amongst five soccer mods. TFTF just happened to be the most recent to come into contact with you from what I can tell from reading the posts.

The only point I could find that was awry was that in one of those eleven infractions, the field indicating the cause of the infraction had been incorrectly filled out; you never indicated any confusion to any of the mods, so it couldn't be fixed at the time. For what it's worth today, the actual infraction was for back seat modding, rather than abuse.

Headshot

Sparks wrote: »

I went back through your eleven most recent infractions in the Soccer forum. All were violations of the charter as written. As such, I don't see grounds to overturn them.

As to moderator bias, those eleven infractions didn't come from any one moderator more than any other, they were split reasonably evenly between six soccer mods, between 1 and 3 infractions apiece, and more than one with three. Your five bans from the Soccer forum over the past year likewise were split amongst five soccer mods. TFTF just happened to be the most recent to come into contact with you from what I can tell from reading the posts.

The only point I could find that was awry was that in one of those eleven infractions, the field indicating the cause of the infraction had been incorrectly filled out; you never indicated any confusion to any of the mods, so it couldn't be fixed at the time. For what it's worth today, the actual infraction was for back seat modding, rather than abuse.

I didnt ask you to look over my 11 infractions, mainly the 6/7 that got me banned
as for the TFTF bias against me or utd fans, I would like to drop that, i mentioned it in my op, lack of proof

I would like a review of my 6/7 cards that have gotten me banned especially the lazy bum (which i got a pm from the user I call a lazy bum saying no way should i get a yellow for that and the TFTF going over xavi's head to infract me
I also got pms from xavi about that too

and please dont hide behind the sf charter , use common sense please and ask the sf mods of me contribution to the sf

bonkey

Heya...sorry (again) for my slowness in responding here. Real Life has been getting in the way again, but I'm hopefully going to have more time now.

Headshot wrote: »

as for the TFTF bias against me or utd fans, I would like to drop that, i mentioned it in my op, lack of proof

Fair enough. Lets drop that, then.

I would like a review of my 6/7 cards that have gotten me banned especially the lazy bum (which i got a pm from the user I call a lazy bum saying no way should i get a yellow for that and the TFTF going over xavi's head to infract me
I also got pms from xavi about that too

I gotta say, I'm not so happy about the notion that you think all 6/7 are worth reviewing.

It smacks a bit of "there has to be one there somewhere" rather then "this is a case where I was genuinely wronged". Are you honestly telling me that you think every single one of them was un-merited?

For the moment...I'm going to review the two that you mentioned explicitly. I'm not done on those yet...but here's where I am...

Lets start with T4TF v Xavi...

I think Xavi had somewhat of a point about the manner in which T4TF overruled him, but I don't think its grounds enough to reverse the infraction.

I would say, however, that as a general guideline (which I'd be guilty of not always having followed in my time), that if co-mods have an issue with each other's moderation, the first thing they should do is discuss it with each other, and agree on what (if anything) to do.

I haven't had a look (yet) into the background of what all has gone on here, so for the moment I'm just going to say that this one is open for me.

So...on to the case of the "lazy bum"...

First off, I fully accept your explanation that you meant the comment in jest, and that it was a bit of light-hearted ribbing. I can see your point...that its harsh getting penalised for a bit of fun.

I'd like you to ask you a question though...if someone called you a lazy bum, and it was clear that they weren't joking, but were genuinely taking a dig at you....would you find that acceptable for the forum, or would you consider it to fall foul of the "don't call people names" rule?

Headshot

bonkey wrote: »

Heya...sorry (again) for my slowness in responding here. Real Life has been getting in the way again, but I'm hopefully going to have more time now.


Fair enough. Lets drop that, then.



I gotta say, I'm not so happy about the notion that you think all 6/7 are worth reviewing.
I said the 2 cards above are the main ones I want reviewed, i shouldnt have mentioned 6/7 apologies

It smacks a bit of "there has to be one there somewhere" rather then "this is a case where I was genuinely wronged". Are you honestly telling me that you think every single one of them was un-merited?

For the moment...I'm going to review the two that you mentioned explicitly. I'm not done on those yet...but here's where I am...

Lets start with T4TF v Xavi...

I think Xavi had somewhat of a point about the manner in which T4TF overruled him, but I don't think its grounds enough to reverse the infraction.
I think it is, a mod thought it was just an on thread warning, xavi didnt think it warranted a yellow at all, hence getting a infraction was extremely harsh. afaik TFTF didnt even ask other mods about the decision, he certainly didnt ask xavi anyway (if im reading his pms right) sots has been called his past usernames on the sf in the off topic thread and were deleted, which is fair enough and a mod gave a on thread warning iirc , just like what xavi did

I would say, however, that as a general guideline (which I'd be guilty of not always having followed in my time), that if co-mods have an issue with each other's moderation, the first thing they should do is discuss it with each other, and agree on what (if anything) to do.


I haven't had a look (yet) into the background of what all has gone on here, so for the moment I'm just going to say that this one is open for me.

So...on to the case of the "lazy bum"...

First off, I fully accept your explanation that you meant the comment in jest, and that it was a bit of light-hearted ribbing. I can see your point...that its harsh getting penalised for a bit of fun.

I'd like you to ask you a question though...if someone called you a lazy bum, and it was clear that they weren't joking, but were genuinely taking a dig at you....would you find that acceptable for the forum, or would you consider it to fall foul of the "don't call people names" rule?

Honest truth is, if some called me a troll i wouldnt take it but a lazy bum I would laugh it off because its true that im pretty lazy. Banter bonkey.

and this is what Mr Alan told me about the infraction for calling him a lazy bum "whether or not i reported it, you shouldn't have been infracted for it."

I would love to know who reported me or was that TFTF saw the post and just infracted me ?

Sparks

Headshot wrote: »

sots has been called his past usernames on the sf in the off topic thread and were deleted, which is fair enough and a mod gave a on thread warning iirc , just like what xavi did

As I explained by PM earlier, I think you're confused over why that infraction was given because of an error when filling in the infraction form. You weren't infracted for accusing SOTS of rereging, it was for back seat moderation. I checked with the mods on this point and confirmed it, but by that point you'd chosen to proceed to this stage of the DRP.

Also, while Alan may have PM'd you about the infraction, that's not much help to a moderator making a judgement call. I'd repeat my earlier question to you: did Alan ever PM a moderator about the misunderstanding to explain it to them, either for that infraction, or for the other infractions that occurred from your posts to him in the past?

Headshot

Sparks wrote: »

As I explained by PM earlier, I think you're confused over why that infraction was given because of an error when filling in the infraction form. You weren't infracted for accusing SOTS of rereging, it was for back seat moderation. I checked with the mods on this point and confirmed it, but by that point you'd chosen to proceed to this stage of the DRP.

so its back seat modding now ?? bloody hell how am i supposed to keep up with all these changes ? How come it wasnt said in the infraction ?
seems to me its clutching at straws now

if really you call that back seat modding, i would be speechless. Its basically a nonsense post that didnt deserve a card, an on thread warning was suffice.

Also, while Alan may have PM'd you about the infraction, that's not much help to a moderator making a judgement call. I'd repeat my earlier question to you: did Alan ever PM a moderator about the misunderstanding to explain it to them, either for that infraction, or for the other infractions that occurred from your posts to him in the past?

A judgement call on lazy bum, seriously? are you trying to hide behind the charter again sparks for every minute detail
Im not sure why, maybe he didnt know I got the infraction for it, maybe if he did report it he just wanted it deleted. The Mod daily jobs are just deleting posts etc without infracting. As for the other infraction, why are you even bringing it up for ill never know because it has nothing to do with my review of my 2 cards but ill answer it. It was banter , plan and simple. Maybe the mod who gave it to me just didnt get it or just wanted to shut us up or somthing

Im still waiting on who reported the lazy bum post(or was it even reported and did TFTF consult the other mods about the sots post because he didnt with xavi anyway

bonkey

Headshot...if you're going to use this thread to shout at people who disagree with you, we can end this here and now.

As for who reported it...someone (rightly) gave out in another incident recently when information from reported posts was divulged. There's a reason why reporting of posts is not public, and it would be counter to that for me (or anyone with access to the information) to hand it out.

The post was reported, I can tell you that.

If someone wants to make it known to you that they reported it, that's their decision.

Headshot

bonkey wrote: »

Headshot...if you're going to use this thread to shout at people who disagree with you, we can end this here and now.

As for who reported it...someone (rightly) gave out in another incident recently when information from reported posts was divulged. There's a reason why reporting of posts is not public, and it would be counter to that for me (or anyone with access to the information) to hand it out.

The post was reported, I can tell you that.

If someone wants to make it known to you that they reported it, that's their decision.

shout at people, where am i doing that bonkey?
man I dont know where your getting that from, im very cool and composed here:)

Sparks

Headshot wrote: »

so its back seat modding now ?? bloody hell how am i supposed to keep up with all these changes ? How come it wasnt said in the infraction ?
seems to me its clutching at straws now

I explained to you two days ago what had happened; I've repeated that explanation above. The fact is that you were not informed correctly as to the nature of the offence through error; but that fact does not automatically mean the offence did not happen or that the sanction was incorrect.

if really you call that back seat modding, i would be speechless. Its basically a nonsense post that didnt deserve a card, an on thread warning was suffice.

I did not call it back seat modding. My role here is to try to look at the infraction itself from an outside perspective, in the context of the rules of the forum charter; not to mod the forum. From that perspective, in that context, it was justifiably back seat moderation because you were saying a post did not matter because of a user's name change and saying that they were not welcome in the forum:

he didnt get sick before
just SOTS/lockie/bay/who gives a ****/no it's not great your back/ etc seeing stuff again

The forum charter has two clear points on this:

ABUSE: Outbursts of personal abuse be it directed at other board members or at non-boards persons, famous or otherwise, is strictly prohibited. We reserve the right to edit/move/delete such posts as we see fit and issue bans and/or infractions to the poster of such.

BACK SEAT MODDING:...If you have an issue with a post in this forum, the correct procedure is to use the report post function on the left of the post.

Both of these points are further discussed in the forum charter thread, and both of those expansions explain why what you did was considered infractable.

A judgement call on lazy bum, seriously? are you trying to hide behind the charter again sparks for every minute detail

I have nothing to defend here, that's not my role. As to the charter, it is the sole guide to how a forum's community functions. It sets the context in which all cmods have to evaluate a moderator's judgement calls. "Hiding" behind the charter is a concept that makes no sense because of this.

As for the other infraction, why are you even bringing it up for ill never know because it has nothing to do with my review of my 2 cards

I brought up the other infractions because you asked me to review two specific infractions (and also moderator bias, but that's now been closed). One of those two specific infractions was for the 'lazy bum' comment, which you've explained was banter between yourself and a friend. But you had previous infractions for exactly the same banter with exactly the same friend and I'm asking you to see what the moderator saw - namely that you had been infracted before for berating Alan on a thread, and Alan had never said that it was just banter to a mod or in the forum itself, so the question of whether it was banter or a real insult seemed to be clearly answered as real insult.

Had Alan PM'd a mod and clarified things, the infraction could have been reversed.

Regardless of that however, there is the point that when the 'lazy bum' infraction happened, you knew from past experience that such banter was considered a breach of the forum charter and an infraction could be given out for it.

bonkey

Headshot wrote: »

shout at people, where am i doing that bonkey?
man I dont know where your getting that from, im very cool and composed here:)

Apologies. I obviously read something into your post which wasn't there.

Headshot

going around and around in a circle, id be better off talking to the wall

you know bonkey you can lock this thread please. Im not wasting my time anymore. Its a very sad day you get an infraction for calling someone a twat (seen most days on the sf and yet the majority get away without an infraction, wonder why that is, I reckon TFTF will sort that out) or lazy bum, its really this kind of **** that drives posters away from the sf. Iv been on boards for to long to know how things really work so there's no point even arguing.

bonkey

You came here for an admin to review your case, because you weren't happy with what the Mod and CMod told you.

I haven't offered you the opinion and ruling you asked for. If you don't want it any more - whatever your reason - that's your entitlement.

Thread closed, as requested.