Inconsistent and biased moderation in the soccer forum

LuckyLloyd

Good to see the rules lawyering has progressed onto matters of such grand import, like not being allowed to use a derogatory term of great wit like “Slippy G”.

Hotblack Desiato

Pter wrote: »

Did you report it? What do you want the soccer mods to do? Spend the morning searching the forum for a list of forbidden words?

No. It's the last link in the post above mine.

Beasty

blackwhite wrote: »

TBH, refusing to acknowledge the possibility that such discretion might be abused - especially in the context of such a “tribal” forum as soccer - is one hell of a head in the sand attitude.

Is there really such a fear of acknowledging that sometimes mod appointments might end up shown to have been a bad choice?

You are choosing the wrong example with Soccer. Yes we have had to revisit certain mod appointments, but let's not resurrect that particular issue

Now I spent many years as a Sports CMod. That involved regular interaction with all the Soccer mods in their dedicated forum. No-one will ever get every decision right. However if I felt I could contribute to discussion over possible actions, or indeed a potential reversal of a mod sanction, I would do so. And let's just get one other point over. If decisions are clearcut the mods will make them and action any appropriate sanction. Often they will not get to a thread some time afterwards because, TBH, for the big games they may well be engrossed in the match and only start reading reported posts until some time later. That may even be the following day, or if something is missed possibly on the back of someone re-reporting something

However if unsure the mods will usually discuss it within the mod forum before acting. Hence you may see one specific mod acting, but it's possible that several mods have input into that decision

The other thing those years of CModding made very clear to me was there was absolutely no intention of appearing biased in any way. The mod who has been referred to here probably actions as many Liverpool fans as he does United fans, but that is conveniently overlooked when a mob starts calling for his head

As already indicated, I've actually started looking at the United thread, and TBH some of the things posters have been getting away with in that thread are unacceptable. I have therefore issued a number of in-thread warnings to get the discussion back on track. Of course United are winning again now, and an upturn of fortunes on the pitch usually reflects itself in the behaviour of certain forum regulars.

Just to be clear I acted in a similar way in the Arsenal thread earlier this year, and before that it was the Liverpool thread. Both threads have improved significantly since, but arguably that's down to changes off the pitch and improvements on it. United were not doing well, no-one was closely looking at the thread, and a relatively small number of posters thought they could get away with stuff. When they get called out for it, someone heads over here to complain about mod bias. As I've already said numerous times in this thread, I accept a charge of inconsistency in modding the Soccer forum. I do not believe there is any bias though.

bucketybuck

RoboKlopp wrote: »

Why do people feel the need to put childish names on players anyway. It's done to wind up others and deserves sanctioning every time.

RoboKlopp wrote: »

Also, as predicted by a few people in the this thread, when results have picked up some self exiled posters have come back.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Good to see the rules lawyering has progressed onto matters of such grand import, like not being allowed to use a derogatory term of great wit like “Slippy G”.

Thread title: Inconsistent and biased moderation in the soccer forum.

bucketybuck

Beasty wrote: »

As already indicated, I've actually started looking at the United thread, and TBH some of the things posters have been getting away with in that thread are unacceptable.

The only thing you have seen is a group of posters who have had long standing concerns about the moderation be ignored. Some have left, others don't give a fig any more and react accordingly, none of this should be surprising.

I see the OP has been banned, is this thread to be closed as well?

Trigger

bucketybuck wrote: »

I see the OP has been banned, is this thread to be closed as well?

From what I see in the Prison Forum, the OP was banned for something outside of the SF do should have no bearing on this thread, he is not permabanned so he will be back.

Beasty

bucketybuck wrote: »

The only thing you have seen is a group of posters who have had long standing concerns about the moderation be ignored. Some have left, others don't give a fig any more and react accordingly, none of this should be surprising.

What I have seen is a small group of posters who have chosen not to follow the forum charter, and seem to have been getting away with that. And to be clear, they all know they have been getting away with it, which is why they are now complaining that things are being turned round.

Any inconsistency has, I suspect, benefited United fans as much as fans of other teams. But rest assured, while I'm keeping my eyes on things over there I'll be happy to sanction fans from any club if it's warranted

Will I Am Not

@Beasty
This idea that nobody was keeping an eye on the United thread and the posters have been getting away with murder is nothing but misdirection.

Liverpool fans are omnipresent in that thread, posters that don’t post there but are visible in their thanking of posts that are negative towards anything man united. If you step out of line in the superthread you are reported. It works both ways. To suggest that it was a free for all until you came along is preposterous and embarrassing to be honest.

Rayne Wooney

Will I Am Not wrote: »

@Beasty
This idea that nobody was keeping an eye on the United thread and the posters have been getting away with murder is nothing but misdirection.

Liverpool fans are omnipresent in that thread, posters that don’t post there but are visible in their thanking of posts that are negative towards anything man united. If you step out of line in the superthread you are reported. It works both ways. To suggest that it was a free for all until you came along is preposterous and embarrassing to be honest.

There is no point, a post I made that clearly shows a mod actioned simply because of a poster being who it was rather than the post itself didn’t even make it to this “help desk” thread.

Beasty

Will I Am Not wrote: »

@Beasty
This idea that nobody was keeping an eye on the United thread and the posters have been getting away with murder is nothing but misdirection.

Liverpool fans are omnipresent in that thread, posters that don’t post there but are visible in their thanking of posts that are negative towards anything man united. If you step out of line in the superthread you are reported. It works both ways. To suggest that it was a free for all until you came along is preposterous and embarrassing to be honest.

Stuff that was getting reported was being actioned. A lot of stuff simply did not get reported. You will see from the numerous in-thread warnings I've already made there are a few areas where some posters were simply not following the charter, and yes I summise from that they have been doing so for some time

brinty

Beasty wrote:

Stuff that was getting reported was being actioned. A lot of stuff simply did not get reported. You will see from the numerous in-thread warnings I've already made there are a few areas where some posters were simply not following the charter, and yes I summise from that they have been doing so for some time

You can only mean people questioning mod actions on thread as there has been virtually no other charter breaches over the last number of months, at least from United fans.

So basically the situation is

A) mod actions can't be questioned on thread

mod actions can't be questioned in the annual forum feedback thread

C) people that question mod actions in the help desk are basically told by an admin that it's all in their heads and that they're simply a bunch of malcontents with a hair up their hole over "their" mod being demodded

So for all intents and purposes, the situation is don't question mod actions anywhere on the site.

That's fair alright.

Beasty

Right, here are the lies, damn lies and statistics

I've gone back through the past 5 weeks of cards issued in the Soccer Forum - that's to the beginning of December. I appreciate this thread had already been started then, but it has taken a bit of time just to cover that period

During that time 24 yellow cards have been issued. Of those 24 cards, 17 were issued to Liverpool fans, 3 to United fans and 4 to fans of 4 other premiership clubs

Yes the mod in question issued all 3 "united" cards. But he also issued 6 against Liverpool fans. The others were issued by the other mods and me. In my view he accusations of bias by a Liverpool supporting mod against United fans have absolutely no standing. Equally such acquisitions could be thrown against the United fan who has issued cards during that period - 5 against Liverpool fans and none against United fans

Rayne Wooney

So 35% of the Liverpool cards and 100% of the United cards?

Beasty

brinty wrote: »

You can only mean people questioning mod actions on thread as there has been virtually no other charter breaches over the last number of months, at least from United fans.

Maybe you should go back and re-read all my in-thread warnings. None were about questioning mod actions in thread - I made it clear in each warning that posters should PM me with any queries. All but one of those warnings included commentary on terminology that is not acceptable, be that "slippy G", or indeed "arse" (as a reference to Arsenal)

If you are saying there has been a lot of questioning of mod actions, I will have to take your word for it as I've only been focussing on the thread since this thread was started towards the end of November

I can confirm mod actions cannot be challenged in thread. There are other avenues to deal with that, including PM'ing the mod, discussing it with a CMod, or indeed starting a thread in Help Desk

When it comes to the annual Feedback thread, it is not intended to dissect individual mod actions. That does not mean that examples cannot be quoted to support a position. But if there's only one potential example, then there's equally not going to be anything to be gained by discussing it there as it's a general feedback on what's been happening and whether any changes are appropriate to forum rules

Beasty

Rayne Wooney wrote: »

So 35% of the Liverpool cards and 100% of the United cards?

And???

Seriously - you want to make something out of that

OK I'll spell it out a bit more - twice as many to Liverpool fans (ie+100%). Does that make you feel any better?

So a thread opens with accusations of Moderation bias and you investigate the period after it opens only and come up with conclusion of no moderation bias. Would it not make more sense to look into before the thread started.
And given you are looking into bias would it also not make sense to look into weather the cards were justified and not the actual number of cards per fan base. As you have already acknowledged posting numbers are way down from one set of the fan bases being discussed.

Also I was recently informed that Mods/Admins can't action breaches of the charter once a game has finished and I was wondering if you could inform everyone which parts of the charter this specifically refers to or is it all of the charter?

blackwhite

Beasty wrote: »

You are choosing the wrong example with Soccer. Yes we have had to revisit certain mod appointments, but let's not resurrect that particular issue

Now I spent many years as a Sports CMod. That involved regular interaction with all the Soccer mods in their dedicated forum. No-one will ever get every decision right. However if I felt I could contribute to discussion over possible actions, or indeed a potential reversal of a mod sanction, I would do so. And let's just get one other point over. If decisions are clearcut the mods will make them and action any appropriate sanction. Often they will not get to a thread some time afterwards because, TBH, for the big games they may well be engrossed in the match and only start reading reported posts until some time later. That may even be the following day, or if something is missed possibly on the back of someone re-reporting something

However if unsure the mods will usually discuss it within the mod forum before acting. Hence you may see one specific mod acting, but it's possible that several mods have input into that decision

The other thing those years of CModding made very clear to me was there was absolutely no intention of appearing biased in any way. The mod who has been referred to here probably actions as many Liverpool fans as he does United fans, but that is conveniently overlooked when a mob starts calling for his head

As already indicated, I've actually started looking at the United thread, and TBH some of the things posters have been getting away with in that thread are unacceptable. I have therefore issued a number of in-thread warnings to get the discussion back on track. Of course United are winning again now, and an upturn of fortunes on the pitch usually reflects itself in the behaviour of certain forum regulars.

Just to be clear I acted in a similar way in the Arsenal thread earlier this year, and before that it was the Liverpool thread. Both threads have improved significantly since, but arguably that's down to changes off the pitch and improvements on it. United were not doing well, no-one was closely looking at the thread, and a relatively small number of posters thought they could get away with stuff. When they get called out for it, someone heads over here to complain about mod bias. As I've already said numerous times in this thread, I accept a charge of inconsistency in modding the Soccer forum. I do not believe there is any bias though.

Beasty - with the greatest of respect - none of that actually addresses the concerns in the OP.

Nobody is calling into question the behaviour of you as a mod.
And how you avoided displaying bias or favouritism is Grady - but doesn’t mean that you should automatically assume that other mods won’t abuse the ability to use discretion.

We’ve seen instances outside of the soccer forum where mods took advantage of their position based on personal bias - to assume that it couldn’t possibly happen in the sports section, based on your own experience of behaviing properly and honerably, comes across as more than a bit niaive.

If someone came back and said they’d seen instances of the mod in question issueing sanctions to Liverpool fans which were extreme “letter of the law” sanctions (similar to how that mod has been documented on this thread as treading Man Utd fans) then that might be something to actually address or countermine the complaints in the OP.

Instead the response is repeatedly deflecting from the actual complaint, and yet again trying to deflect it to blame Man Utd fans who aren’t happy with recent performances.

The flat out refusal to even consider that a mod might abuse their ability to use discretion doesn’t paint a great picture TBH

Beasty

Deleted User wrote: »

So a thread opens with accusations of Moderation bias and you investigate the period after it opens only and come up with conclusion of no moderation bias. Would it not make more sense to look into before the thread started.

OK, looking for the yellow cards issued by the mod in question for the month prior to this thread starting, in reverse order, and identifying the supported team

Ireland
Ireland
United
Liverpool
United
Liverpool
Liverpool
Liverpool
Spurs
United
Liverpool

5 x Liverpool versus 3 x United

Beasty

blackwhite wrote: »

Beasty - with the greatest of respect - none of that actually addresses the concerns in the OP.

I was addressing your post. In doing so I was giving you the benefit of my own experience working with the mod team in question, and indeed the procedures they undertake before sanctioning anything that may be in a grey area

I have addressed the OP extensively throughout this thread, but it seems whatever I say some people will not want to accept my own views that there is no bias

Now we have a mod team comprising fans of Liverpool, Spurs, Chelsea, Arsenal, the LOI, and indeed one mod who probably favours United amongst Premiership teams. We have a CMod who is an Arsenal fan. We have Admins who are Leeds. Chelsea and United fans. I think one of us would notice bias if there genuinely was any. Yes we all make mistakes, yes there is definitely inconsistency which I am trying to help with by keeping my eye on the United thread.

So what more do you want?

Anyway it's off to bed for me now. Goodnight

Beasty

Deleted User wrote: »

Also I was recently informed that Mods/Admins can't action breaches of the charter once a game has finished and I was wondering if you could inform everyone which parts of the charter this specifically refers to or is it all of the charter?

I'll just clear that one up while I'm here. There's no such rule

bucketybuck

No bias, no problems, in fact the real issue is the bunch of fans who were complaining in the first place. Sounds about right to me.

I genuinely believe this thread should be closed before it does any more harm.

brinty

Beasty wrote: »

Right, here are the lies, damn lies and statistics

I've gone back through the past 5 weeks of cards issued in the Soccer Forum - that's to the beginning of December. I appreciate this thread had already been started then, but it has taken a bit of time just to cover that period

During that time 24 yellow cards have been issued. Of those 24 cards, 17 were issued to Liverpool fans, 3 to United fans and 4 to fans of 4 other premiership clubs

Yes the mod in question issued all 3 "united" cards. But he also issued 6 against Liverpool fans. The others were issued by the other mods and me. In my view he accusations of bias by a Liverpool supporting mod against United fans have absolutely no standing. Equally such acquisitions could be thrown against the United fan who has issued cards during that period - 5 against Liverpool fans and none against United fans

So since the start of this thread?

I wonder why? Possibly a reaction to mutiple posters calling out his bull****.

Also, do you no find it strange that there are two Liverpool fans specifically posting in this thread and are doing there best to skew the topic? His local chums?

Have you considered reviewing how many cards the mod in question issued prior to the thread being opened within a given window of maybe a year or something?

The under the cover action going on is a tad bit obvious.

Bobeagleburger

Beasty wrote: »

Right, here are the lies, damn lies and statistics

I've gone back through the past 5 weeks of cards issued in the Soccer Forum - that's to the beginning of December. I appreciate this thread had already been started then, but it has taken a bit of time just to cover that period

During that time 24 yellow cards have been issued. Of those 24 cards, 17 were issued to Liverpool fans, 3 to United fans and 4 to fans of 4 other premiership clubs

Yes the mod in question issued all 3 "united" cards. But he also issued 6 against Liverpool fans. The others were issued by the other mods and me. In my view he accusations of bias by a Liverpool supporting mod against United fans have absolutely no standing. Equally such acquisitions could be thrown against the United fan who has issued cards during that period - 5 against Liverpool fans and none against United fans

This is the second set of stats in this thread that show that the accusation of bias is bogus.

Beasty

brinty wrote: »

So since the start of this thread?

I wonder why? Possibly a reaction to mutiple posters calling out his bull****.

Please read my follow-up post - #139 above, which shows info concerning the mod for the month prior to this thread starting

Harry Palmr

Perceptions of bias once embedded are not refutable to the offended even when refuted.

Utd supporters are now looking for evidence to back up their contention and they'll find it because stuff gets through. It might be better to draw a line under this fruitless exercise and instigate a new rule - no opposition fans are allowed to post on dedicated club threads and that all cross club chat must be in the general Premier League thread which is ostensibly neutral ground.

LuckyLloyd

Rayne Wooney wrote: »

So 35% of the Liverpool cards and 100% of the United cards?

This witch hunt has become embarrassingly transparent.

How many different ways do you guys need to hear ‘we accept there’s some in deliberate inconsistency but it’s a known defect that’s difficult to eradicate without killing the forum’ and ‘we reject claims of bias’? You wanted an eye for an eye, you’ve given it a good shot - you’ve had various mods / Cmods / Admins genuinely look into this for you and give you your answer.

There is no bias in modding from the remaining mod team, time to accept it.

LuckyLloyd

brinty wrote: »

Also, do you no find it strange that there are two Liverpool fans specifically posting in this thread and are doing there best to skew the topic? His local chums?

TRTF isn’t my closest chum, far from it! I’ve been carded a few times by him over the years. But he’s clearly not “biased” in his modding and never was. This isn’t a Liverpool / Utd thing for me: it’s a fundamental issue of how the forum is run generally. It is vital that calls to radically alter the running of the place borne out of petty motives be opposed. I’ve been using the forum for 12 years and I’d hope it’s there for 12 more. The charter we have is a function of a lot of experiments, failures, discussions, improvements over the years - ultimately a lot of effort and patience from the mod team.

Don’t ruin the forum because a few people want vengeance (despite their protestations to the contrary). It’s too important.

Beasty

In defence of United fans generally, it's only a small number who seem to have issue. I've tried to explain things in this thread in a way that rebuts any "allegations". Unfortunately once it gets in someone's mind it can be difficult to displace such concerns. By keeping this thread open I had hoped that those "complaining" could get a better view of what goes on, and the information is in this thread if anyone wants further reassurance.

Next year it will probably be fans of another team calling "foul", as that is a pattern I've seen around here over an extended period

The mod in question has been in place for a very long time. When he saw some of the commentary in this thread he offered to step down, but I really don't want him to do that. He is far too much of an asset to the forum.

I will though leave one final thought to those who have been complaining about him. Would any of you like to take the crap he and the other Soccer mods have to put up with? Seriously?

Thread closed