Kerrigooney wrote: » Why is Kess still a mod? He hasn't even logged into Boards for 9 months. Surely his modship(?) could be taken up by someone else.
rarnes1 wrote: » Modship? Please tell me that's a word!
Headshot wrote: » God I make a great mod. I would rule with an iron fist. Iv seen the crap that goes on in the Liverpool thread (trolls and wums) by the time im done there wont be a liverpool thread lol
Washington Irving wrote: » In fairness, it's very rare you see that. Completely cringeworthy, but not exactly harming/insulting anyone. Although, given 'Chelski' isn't allowed, maybe other silly nicknames should be treated the same.
Headshot wrote: » Not beable to post in the superthread during your teams match. I have no interest in the game thread because its usually a cesspool of trolling.
Washington Irving wrote: » Indeed, and Frisbee has one post in the SF in the past nine months. Must be years since he's done any modding here
Will I Amnt wrote: » What exactly is the problem with a few people discussing a match in the superthread that don't want to read the pages of crap in a match thread? It's for 2 hours once a week sometimes twice, it's hardly going to ruin the threads.
Lord TSC wrote: » I always feel that this is one of those arguments that don't pan out when you examine the "problem" in depth. Yeah, there's a few posters who enter a thread to lol when a team they dislike concede, but for the most part, that's not "trolling"; it's simply part and parcel of football. There's highs and lows, and there'll be people who enjoy seeing their rival fans "suffer". When there's clear cases of trolling, we'll always try and action them asap, but there's some who declare match threads as train wrecks before the threads even start, and seem to just not want to have to engage with other groups of fans at all. As much as I detest the word "banter", there is a line between trolling and "banter", and everyone seems to set the line in different places. But if we start calling that line of discussion "trolling", 90% of the board will be purged. :P
Caovyn Lineah wrote: » If people choose to act like kids, they'll do what kids do and eventually get bored and move on. Some of the moderation here, in my opinion, is borderline ridiculous.
K-9 wrote: » I think the main point is it is harder for outsiders to join in a match discussion on another teams super thread. Some use super threads to avoid any criticism or objective comment from rival fans on the match. Really, as with the humour thread, some posters need to grow a thicker skin. Superthreads discussing significant events like managerial decisions, form of a player, stuff like that, no problem. Posting in them to avoid a bit of ribbing from other fans, not to be encouraged.
anncoates wrote: » How can people follow a game properly if they're posting and trolling other fans on the Internet all the way through. I've always wondered.
K-9 wrote: » I think the main point is it is harder for outsiders to join in a match discussion on another teams super thread.
dfx- wrote: » For me it's the principle of a mixed fan forum. That you mix and read a variety of opinions.
Will I Amnt wrote: » Nobody is asking to get rid of match threads. They can still be the focal point of match discussion, I just find it unnecessary to shut down the discussion in the super thread for the duration of the game that the ball is in play whether it be to avoid trolling or just the general clusterf*ck that some threads can become.
LuckyLloyd wrote: » The game ends does it not? After the game ends the superthreads offer a cross fan platform for game discussion if people want it. Plenty of people utilise that option also.