UPDATES TO THE CHARTER

Neil3030

Please read this post.

Things are getting too prickly around here and this new initiative is an extension of what's been implemented on other boards which have dealt with similar issues.

From now on, please adhere to, and report any suspicions of breaches of, these new groundrules for what will henceforth be considered personal abuse.

Not sure some of the new rules make sense.

For example, the reference to personal abuse of organisations. That surely impersonal. Nor is there any criticism exemption, as exists for players. So we cannot, say, slam the Ravens or the NFL for the way they handled the Ray Rice matter? That seems excessive.

Personal abuse against players again seems excessive. So from now on, we can't say Meriweather or Suh are dirty players, that being a character attack, and we must say they are players who have repeatedly played dirty?

Surely a rule involving personal abuse against other posters, along with rules about trolling, repetition and the like, should be enough?

SantryRed

So you can't accuse teams of cheating anymore or discuss teams that may be cheating? Seriously? That seems way over the top and a complete over reaction to the deflategate thread.

What about proven cheating like the Patriots with the spying?

Btw, this isn't an attack on the Patriots before some people obviously pick it up like that. But I just find that new rule way to excessive.

EDIT: on further thinking, it genuinely feels like pandering to the biggest supporting base on this forum with this rule. As we all know it is to do with the Patriots.

I assume the Browns thread and Rodgers thread should also be locked so? They're still on the top 2 pages.

poldebruin

I agree with Conor74, this new amendment is over reaching and unnecessary. Character attacks are only an issue if part of an ad hominem argument. Plenty of players have major character issues, sometimes worthy of attacking. On the minor side of the scale, Josh Gordon is a fool for running afoul of the league drug-testing policy. Adrian Peterson is guilty of whipping his 4 year old son with a branch. Johnny Manziel is immature and a waster (thus far).....all these are fair comment imo.

Connor is also correct in saying that organisations can't be victims of a personal attack. There was plenty of vitriol being thrown around about the NFL and Roger Goodell recently. Much worse than what we have seen in recent days. Nothing was mentioned then and rightly so.

Maybe I missed something in the Daflategate thread - were posts removed? From what I could tell most posters were being reasoned on both sides, and I was enjoying the discussion. Surely problem posters should have been dealt with on a case by case basis?

Finally, as to the thread being locked, I think we're all suffering from deflategate fatigue, but locking a thread in the midst of one of the biggest stories of the NFL (whether you agree it should be or not) until the official report comes out sets a dangerous precedent in my opinion (maybe dangerous is overstating it somewhat, but you get what I mean)

Edit to add: I completely agree to these reminders - but feel they are covered by the flamebaiting, trolling and provocation in the original charter.
Personal abuse against other posters, including the nature and style of their posts.
Personal abuse against fans, including name-calling, racism, accusations of preciousness, paranoia, defensiveness, etc.

Realt Dearg Sec

There should be a rule that for every post someone puts up about cheating or ball inflation, they have to have at least two posts actually dealing with football (three if you're posting about how another poster doesn't understand the issue as well as you do or is a hypocrite for some reason). It might balance up the size of that thread as against the actual superbowl thread, and give people a chance to cool the jets over what is, ultimately, not a very important issue.

I would be happy to nominate someone else to police this.

poldebruin

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

There should be a rule that for every post someone puts up about cheating or ball inflation, they have to have at least two posts actually dealing with football (three if you're posting about how another poster doesn't understand the issue as well as you do or is a hypocrite for some reason). It might balance up the size of that thread as against the actual superbowl thread, and give people a chance to cool the jets over what is, ultimately, not a very important issue.

I would be happy to nominate someone else to police this.

I agree there does seem to be a dearth of non-deflated football talk on this of all weeks. Even finding good articles seems impossible this week. Journalists who aren't talking about it, are writing about how tired they are of it, which is equally as tiresome.

That said, we can't complain because an issue is generating so much discussion whether we think the issue is important or not. It is what it is.

I remember the Tim Tebow thread from a couple of years ago - people were getting so hot under the collar that people were even discussing him and that so much time was being devoted to him, the thread was so long, people asked for that thread to be locked if I recall.

Neil3030

Not having a go at Neil3030, but here is an example of a post that could not be allowed here...by Neil3030...

Neil3030 wrote: »

Yeah... guiding a fractious ego-maniacal Chelsea team to a European final and probable Champion's League spot, impeccably rotating his squad through a hellish schedule, all while the fans persistently berate him with vitriol. What a mountebank... :rolleyes:

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that type of post at all, just puzzled why it's fine on the soccer forum and banned here.

Obviously, we cannot use the words "fractious ego-maniacal" to describe an organisation or group on this forum, nor can we tarnish the fans of any team as people who might persistently use vitriol.

That seems over the top. If busier forums can manage it, why can't this one?

Bateman

I find it amusing that the forum is basically having a bit of a meltdown over the deflated balls thing. If people don’t want to talk about it, don’t contribute to the thread.

If the thread is busy and it is at the top of the forum, that to me means that people want to talk about it – if they didn’t, it wouldn’t be at the top of the forum.

It’s also highly amusing that people can’t state facts such as that the Patriots are a cheating organisation, when this is a proven fact.

Do we effectively have a situation here where a little New England mafia (who in fairness, might all be high-volume contributors to the forum) have gone crying to the mods like babies and cause these totally unreasonable rules to be implemented? I’m asking a question here and not saying this is what has happened btw.

kryogen

If something has been proven there is no problem, it is the unproven/unfounded accusations that seem to be the issue.

Explain how it is a fact that the Patriots are a cheating organisation, if it is a proven fact there shouldn't be an issue.

Discussion of the spying itself would be fine, saying that the Pats were done for cheating in relation to that would also be fine surely, but to say the entire organisation is a cheating one, and its a proven fact is a dumb thing to say, and is going to provoke a response, which 9/10 is the purpose for posting something dumb like that, when you are posting to get a response, a rise from others that is called baiting, which is not allowed as per the charter.

eagle eye

I have to admit I think these new rules are going a bit too far. I don't think there is anything wrong with saying you don't like a franchise or a specific player.

Adding something about him like an unproven reason for not liking him is going too far though.

For example Big Ben is a good example. Saying you don't like the guy over the Lake Tahoe or the Capital City Nightclub incidents for me is fine, but coming out and saying that he is a rapist or anything like that would be very wrong imo.

I often have said I don't like the Ravens and it goes all the way back to them moving out of Cleveland and leaving those people with no football team. I don't think there is anything wrong with that?

Some of the stuff that has been going on here recently though is just going beyond the line. In the thread that has been closed there was a lot of stuff about how the Patriots were cheats and pretty much 'once a cheat always a cheat' type stuff. I don't think that is fair at all and I don't think it was fair to Patriots fans to have to put up with it. It really does seem like baiting to me.

poldebruin

kryogen wrote: »

If something has been proven there is no problem, it is the unproven/unfounded accusations that seem to be the issue.

The problem with this reasoning is that much of what we love to discuss on a fans forum is speculation and what ifs.......if we restrict it to what can only be proven a lot of the fun and discussion goes away.

The fact is that this is not just a big story in American Football circles, it has crossed over into mainstream media .

...yet we're now told we can't discuss it, on of allplaces, an American Football forum. Now, my guess is the thread seemed to be winding down naturally by all accounts

kryogen wrote: »

Discussion of the spying itself would be fine, saying that the Pats were done for cheating in relation to that would also be fine surely, but to say the entire organisation is a cheating one, and its a proven fact is a dumb thing to say, and is going to provoke a response, which 9/10 is the purpose for posting something dumb like that, when you are posting to get a response, a rise from others that is called baiting, which is not allowed as per the charter.

I agree with what you're saying here - it is already covered in the existing Charter. But I'd hate to go down the road of people reporting posts left right and centre. Your own post in calling the previous post dumb is an example what might not be allowed under the charter too.

kryogen

I agree, I also think the new rules are a little too stringent, but something certainly needed to be done and rules can be tweaked or whatever over time if there is consensus surely

poldebruin

eagle eye wrote: »

Some of the stuff that has been going on here recently though is just going beyond the line. In the thread that has been closed there was a lot of stuff about how the Patriots were cheats and pretty much 'once a cheat always a cheat' type stuff. I don't think that is fair at all and I don't think it was fair to Patriots fans to have to put up with it. It really does seem like baiting to me.

I think most of the posters on the forum would "recognise" that line of argument and reasoning as invalid and it generally undermines the rest of any of the posters point. for me it marks out the posts that are to be taken seriously or not. Surely just reporting the offending ones is enough?

Adamcp898

I think there just needs to be infractions issued for comments whose only purpose is obviously to goad other posters as well as all the back-handed insults and petty crap.

I know that's terribly broad and is difficult to put into words in a charter but a sweep of infractions for those kind of comments would clean this forum up a lot faster imo as I think this updated charter is basically saying that nothing bad can be said about anyone or anything ever. Our version of the blasphemy law if you will

Mr. Guappa

But if the Deflategate thread is locked where can all the haters go to apologise for jumping the gun??

helimachoptor

Mr. Guappa wrote: »

But if the Deflategate thread is locked where can all the haters go to apologise for jumping the gun??

Patriots thread :pac:

poldebruin

Mr. Guappa wrote: »

But if the Deflategate thread is locked where can all the haters go to apologise for jumping the gun??

Really....in a thread discussing changes to the Charter and posters conduct?

Mr. Guappa

poldebruin wrote: »

Really....in a thread discussing changes to the Charter and posters conduct?

I just think that locking that thread was not necessary. Stamp down on the baiting for sure, but not allowing discussion of a huge topic in the NFL right now seems very excessive.

SantryRed

eagle eye wrote: »

Some of the stuff that has been going on here recently though is just going beyond the line. In the thread that has been closed there was a lot of stuff about how the Patriots were cheats and pretty much 'once a cheat always a cheat' type stuff. I don't think that is fair at all and I don't think it was fair to Patriots fans to have to put up with it. It really does seem like baiting to me.

WTF? So what if you don't think it's fair, it's some people's belief (and not mine btw) that the Patriots consistently try to bend (and sometimes break) the rules in trying to win. It can kind of be likened to people's belief that United always got soft penos and decisions given to them because of Ferguson and because of who they are.

My problem with this forum over the past year is that the biggest collection by a mile is Patriot fans. And when some of them come to a consensus over some things, it is seen as baiting if you have the opposite view. (again, I'm not saying all Patriots fans, but again, the same thing can be seen when someone has the opposite view in a United/Liverpool superthread on the soccer forum).

The closure of the deflategate thread is nothing short of ridiculous. People getting their knickers in a twist because people want to talk about it, and then posting on such thread, moaning that the post count is so big, when they themselves are posting on the thread. There was ridiculous outrage on both sides, some over the top suggestions that the Patriots should be banned from the Superbowl (which is ****ing stupid for a petty offense) to Patriots fans getting equally as outraged that people were discussing the fact that rules were broken.

It still should never have been closed. No reason why a note couldn't have been made by a mod to say that people should discuss the topic and nothing around that, rather than it being ridiculously shut until the enquiry is over.

clear thinking

I agree with the general sentiment that restrictions and the thread locking are OTT.

A ban on trolling or instruction from mods to take it to PM's would have been sufficient.

It is not as if the deflate-gate thing is sub judicae and our speculation on NFL and public domain club and media statements will have any effect.

I don't disagree with the personal abuse thing, eg between posters, or saying Bellick is an XYZ; but the latter would be covered by trolling if it wasn't an accurate statement (he is a cheat, as proven in the past, but there is no evidence of cheating this time by way of example), and the former by a warning or ban for that poster.

I thought most of the thread was very interesting fwiw, a few eejits shouldn't baby and bathwater the situation.

It's amusing that the only locked thread was one with the rather careful "Pats accused of underinflating balls" title.

The ones screaming "is Aaron Rodgers a Cheat" or "Are the Browns Cheats" remain open. They seem far more provocative.

A cynic might wonder were they started by a Pats fan and if that had a bearing...

Bateman

Basically what has happened here is that Patriots fans have decided they don't want the deflation thing discussed anymore and they have gotten their own way, with the thread being locked. That is breathtaking in terms of non-Patriots fans knowing their place on the forum.

This seems to me to be a lazy alternative to moderators actually moderating.

SantryRed

It's pretty ironic that the only posters to like the thread being locked are all Patriots fans. Again, showing the disparity.

Areyouwell

SantryRed wrote: »

WTF? So what if you don't think it's fair, it's some people's belief (and not mine btw) that the Patriots consistently try to bend (and sometimes break) the rules in trying to win.

I don’t share such misguided beliefs and I am Colts fan. Believe me, I’d really love to believe it, because nobody has suffered as much at their hands in recent years that we have. But the facts speak for themselves, the Patriots have been consistently the most dominant & winningest team in the NLF since the Brady & Belichick partnership began. People are entitled to their misguided beliefs all they want, but facts are facts and the stats speak for themselves. Of course I’d wish Belichick & Brady would feck off and retire and hopefully they’ll go through many, many losing seasons. But I certainly wouldn’t lower myself to the level of vindictive hate and such pettiness for a rival & dominant franchise. Tbh, I love Football too much to do that to myself.

Bateman

Areyouwell wrote: »

stats speak for themselves.

Yes they do

http://linemakers.sportingnews.com/nfl/2015-01-23/tom-brady-patriots-deflate-gate-performance-in-wet-weather-ats-record-colts-game

nasty_crash

the reason ppl hate on the pats is 1 - they win - 2 - they got caught before pushing rules to the limit! Even though every other club probably do the same thing! As a packers fan im neutral to the whole thing - but i do feel that locking the thread goes against the whole idea of boards!! To echo what some of the other guys have said there doesnt seem to be too many pats fans disagreeing with this - seems strange!!

Listening to podcasts from the nfl etc - its still an issue - and will be an issue until it is addressed - do the patriots get kicked from the superbowl - no(dont be silly) - will they be fined - yes - but the issue is that it hasnt been addressed as yet and thats why it is still being dicussed and allowed to be discussed!!!

Areyouwell

Bateman wrote: »

Yes they do

http://linemakers.sportingnews.com/nfl/2015-01-23/tom-brady-patriots-deflate-gate-performance-in-wet-weather-ats-record-colts-game

Ah will you stop. What does some some speculative troll article justify? Ya, you guessed right , apart from s**t stirring, absolutely nothing.

Bateman

So you don’t want to discuss facts now all of a sudden.

OK, we move on.

Putin

Bateman wrote: »

So you don’t want to discuss facts now all of a sudden.

There are no facts in that troll article. Certainly is a fine work of fiction though.

Anyway, haven't you missed the point? Because I don't think this thread was set up to discuss that petty little issue. This thread was only set up to discuss the charter

UnitedIrishman

Think the best thing everyone can do is just step away from that deflategate tit-for-tat thread, draw a line under it and forget about the whole situation because it's the biggest load of bull over nothing. I know it's a forum and free speech and being allowed to give your view but that thread is just a cluster**** of repeated stuff over and over again, with people banging their heads off walls to get their point across.

Aside from that I haven't really found there much need for mods to enforce strict rules. The forum is one of the more enjoyable ones, especially compared to the likes of the soccer forum. Every now and again there is a divide between Pats fans and the rest over some issue - the rest think that the Pats fans feel their infallible and nothing bad should be said wrong about BB/Brady whilst the Pats fans feel that they're under constant attack and need to defend themselves from trolling from others. The truth is somewhere in a big grey area in the middle.

One thing I'd hope for the next week or so is that the Superbowl thread is just purely about the game, and any mention of deflategate should be an offence.

kryogen

Deleted User wrote: »

It's amusing that the only locked thread was one with the rather careful "Pats accused of underinflating balls" title.

The ones screaming "is Aaron Rodgers a Cheat" or "Are the Browns Cheats" remain open. They seem far more provocative.

A cynic might wonder were they started by a Pats fan and if that had a bearing...

At some point you might want to take a little break from the internet you know, it may surprise you to learn that some people can't check boards all day and mods presumably have other things to do then be on hand every minute or every day to close the threads as you see fit

ps, when has passive aggressive bull**** ever been productive?