Soccer Forum Feedback Thread 2015

Oranage2 · 12-06-2015 08:21AM

What about a sticky thread where posters could dispute a card?

The current drp forum doesn't really suit a forum where cards are handed out frequently and for harmless stuff.

My suggestion would be a thread that a poster can appeal a card and mods then can vote to keep or overturn the card.

Beasty · 12-06-2015 08:57AM

Oranage2 wrote: »

What about a sticky thread where posters could dispute a card?

The current drp forum doesn't really suit a forum where cards are handed out frequently and for harmless stuff.

My suggestion would be a thread that a poster can appeal a card and mods then can vote to keep or overturn the card.

This simply cannot happen within the current Boards setup. Any appeals against cards can only be dealt with either directly via discussion with the mod, or escalation to the DRP

Oranage2 · 12-06-2015 09:29AM

Beasty wrote: »

This simply cannot happen within the current Boards setup. Any appeals against cards can only be dealt with either directly via discussion with the mod, or escalation to the DRP

Shame that, but rules are rules.

MagicIRL · 12-06-2015 09:39AM

The only carding I'm against is posts that claim a player is a useless bollox or something similar, and people get carded for being mean to the player or some nonsense.

Lovely Bloke · 12-06-2015 09:42AM

"Heat of the moment" is a get out for abuse. As rarnes has said, and I've been saying for years; there is NO heat of the moment on forums.

You think about what you want to post, you type it, you look over, you click submit. That process in and of itself takes the heat out of any moment, you literally have to think about what you are posting.

So, it's not comparable to being at a match and seeing the ref not give a blatant penalty for your team, then blurting out "FFS REF you blind prick", because while sitting at home watching a match on the telly and seeing that same incident, and probably blurting out "FFS REF you blind prick", then deciding, actually, I'm going to post that on the internet. Type it, look at it, click submit.

That "moment" is gone. You've consciously decided to go on the internet and call the referee a prick.

Deal with the consequences of that like an adult, instead of claiming to be a child with no control of their faculties.

12-06-2015 09:43AM

MagicIRL wrote: »

The only carding I'm against is posts that claim a player is a useless bollox or something similar, and people get carded for being mean to the player or some nonsense.

Why even put the word bollox there though?

Player X is useless

Player X is a useless bollox

Surely it's not hard to just not call them anything?

I don't think it's generally a major issue though

Buford T. Justice XIX · 12-06-2015 10:14AM

rarnes1 wrote: »

2 acts of trolling should be a permanent ban imo.

We don't all have multiply accounts, though;)

I think the forum is working just fine atm. Re-writing the charter will result in a lot of confusion for all existing posters which would be a shame considering how well everything is going currently.

Certainly, re-write some sections to include any changes over the last while but leave it as is now it's working.

Oranage2 · 12-06-2015 11:41AM

rarnes1 wrote: »

Why even put the word bollox there though?

Player X is useless

Player X is a useless bollox

Surely it's not hard to just not call them anything?

I don't think it's generally a major issue though

But say a player gives away a penalty and you write, what a clown - that could get you a card too.

Will I Amnt · 12-06-2015 12:14PM

Maybe don't call him a clown then?

Lucas Hood · 12-06-2015 12:18PM

Will I Amnt wrote: »

Maybe don't call him a clown then?

How about silly billy?

Lovely Bloke · 12-06-2015 01:31PM

Oranage2 wrote: »

But say a player gives away a penalty and you write, what a clown - that could get you a card too.

why would you write that, in the full knowledge that calling a player names is against the charter?

Better to ban all namecalling than have grey areas where the likes of you can be pedantic so-and-sos saying, "Oh well, the name I used is not as offensive as the name he used, so I shouldn't be sanctioned" - can you not understand how much of a nightmare that would be to moderate?

For example, I personally do not find the word "clown" offensive, but nor do I find the word "cúnt" offensive, so if I write "What a cúnt", I'd be outraged to be sanctioned under the rules as you'd want them.

Where is the line drawn?

Silly billy
Clown
Eejit
Geebag
Bastard
Fúcker
Cúnt

all names you could call a player for doing something in a match. Which ones are let go? Which ones are sanctioned.

I don't care if someone calls my favourite player on my favourite team a cúnt, so what tbh, but you might get offended if I call YOUR favourite player an eejit.

adox · 12-06-2015 01:33PM

Geebag should always be allowed in every situation.

pmasterson95 · 12-06-2015 02:25PM

adox wrote: »

Geebag should always be allowed in every situation.

Shut up geebag

5starpool · 12-06-2015 02:42PM

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

why would you write that, in the full knowledge that calling a player names is against the charter?

Better to ban all namecalling than have grey areas where the likes of you can be pedantic so-and-sos saying, "Oh well, the name I used is not as offensive as the name he used, so I shouldn't be sanctioned" - can you not understand how much of a nightmare that would be to moderate?

For example, I personally do not find the word "clown" offensive, but nor do I find the word "cúnt" offensive, so if I write "What a cúnt", I'd be outraged to be sanctioned under the rules as you'd want them.

Where is the line drawn?

Silly billy
Clown
Eejit
Geebag
Bastard
Fúcker
Cúnt

all names you could call a player for doing something in a match. Which ones are let go? Which ones are sanctioned.

I don't care if someone calls my favourite player on my favourite team a cúnt, so what tbh, but you might get offended if I call YOUR favourite player an eejit.

All about context really. It annoys me to see a poster get a card for calling a player a twat for doing something silly or making a mistake on the pitch. this is why mods are people who can tell context (most of the time) rather than blind automotans who are blind to it. It seems to me that this season there has been an increase in sense and discretion and it's been a good thing.

Will I Amnt · 12-06-2015 02:44PM

5starpool wrote: »

All about context really. It annoys me to see a poster get a card for calling a player a twat for doing something silly or making a mistake on the pitch. this is why mods are people who can tell context (most of the time) rather than blind automotans who are blind to it. It seems to me that this season there has been an increase in sense and discretion and it's been a good thing.

I got a card for calling Vidic a twat for doing something silly, thought it was harsh at the time but I've never made that mistake again.

5starpool · 12-06-2015 02:55PM

Will I Amnt wrote: »

I got a card for calling Vidic a twat for doing something silly, thought it was harsh at the time but I've never made that mistake again.

It was harsh, but I get the point. It's the same reason why I don't do it myself, but it still doesn't make it a good rule when applied rigidly. It makes modding appear less consistent and more nuanced, and I realise I'm probably on the minority side of the argument, but nuance is a good thing when done right.

cson · 12-06-2015 03:00PM

Nuance and common sense do go a long way.

A couple of years ago I remember getting a 2 week ban for 2 yellows, one of which I had got in August and the 2nd one in May. Almost put me off ever posting here again.

dfx- · 12-06-2015 03:10PM

As Al Capwned outlined, one person could be banned for saying the same thing as another who doesn't get banned and more red cards leads to permanent bans quicker.

It might lead to paranoia that mods are out to get people over others or certain clubs over others and bias and a lot of whataboutery that might cause mod burnout, but Beasty's proposal has a huge impact on posters than mods.

I think the theme of this thread is that the forum is settled as it is, for which the credit is due to all posters.

TheDoc · 12-06-2015 04:07PM

This actually reminds me of something that came up a few weeks ago.

The charter has a general outline for "words" and "phrases" that are considered inflammatory, but it doesn't go to state what exactly these words are. The assumption is that it will be open to common sense.

So while I could perfectly understand someone being pulled up for say "Manchester ****ty" or "lolerpool", it appears some cards have been handed out for names being used that have caused offense to posters.

The most obvious one to come to light was "Slippy G". I have to say it kinda knocked me for six. It was shortly after the incident, that became sort of pop culture with gifs, memes and the works being done on just about everywhere. But someone said SlippyG and got banned I believe.

While the mods may be proactive in terms of dealing with issues, more often then not it's a case of responding to a report. I guess the point I'm making is are we not moving into that weir, obscure realm, or how a lot of "offense" is subjective, and personal to the person involved.

For example SlippyG doesn't "offend" me, nor does references to Sir Alex as "red nose" or "red face", or all the other sort of nicknames like that.

I personally hate "banter"(the word) but also the practice, as an excuse for having a laugh with something extremely offensive or controversial, and is as such, obviously.

But when it comes to the above, player names being changed to reflect a recent incident, I think we are moving into the realms of subjective offence, which isn't applicable to everyone.

While I don't partake in that sort of stuff myself, and rarely get into club rivalry stuff and baiting, I do sometimes roll my eyes at seeing punishment handed out for certain things, but again that is mostly subjective as it takes a lot to offend me.

I've a few infractions and cards I believe, and from immediate memory I think one was calling Rooney a "retard" (possibly twice) and while I took umbrage at the initial card, I accepted I wasn't in friends company and that word could cause offense in general public, which is fair enough.

Another infraction was I believe telling a poster to go **** himself. Again something I accepted without fuss, but did feel a bit "ugh" as I didn't think anyone would take offense, as we regularly engage in debate and thought it would be interpreted like youd say it to your mate with a wry smile.

I'd probably weigh in with above that the forum pretty much looks to be in a good place(for me) I rarely venture outside of my respective clubs superthread, I think that thread is well modded, and there is a good sense of allowing the thread to flow even if it does go a little off topic. I assume as with most, there is a nice community of people there and I think the mods help growing it with doing stellar work in the thread in question.

I've had some pretty horrible experiences in other forums, and one in particular that involved face to face meetings with Boards reps, but all in all I think this forum is very well run, and there seems to genuine common sense in place. In instances I've received infractions, warnings or cards, the mods involved have been good to explain the situation, and happy enough to respond to any queries I have.

Will I Amnt · 12-06-2015 04:14PM

Are mods mindful of "group reporting"?
Like if the same handful of posters were reporting the same people or set of fans.
I think I've read somewhere or was told that a post that gets reported by more people will be more likely to be actioned.

12-06-2015 04:20PM

Permaban people if group reporting. I'd imagine that's a site ban offence.

Does this actually happen? If so was it reported?

Amazing how these things haven't been heard off all season. It's like problems are really being looked for.

Will I Amnt · 12-06-2015 04:22PM

rarnes1 wrote: »

Permaban people if group reporting. I'd imagine that's a site ban offence.

Does this actually happen? If so was it reported?

Amazing how these things haven't been heard off all season. It's like problems are really being looked for.

I don't know. Hence asking the question, we don't get to ask these during the season. That's kind of the point of this thread.

12-06-2015 04:26PM

Will I Amnt wrote: »

I don't know. Hence asking the question, we don't get to ask these during the season. That's kind of the point of this thread.

Fair enough. Seems a bit random.

I'd imagine the mods will know if it happens anyway.

GavRedKing · 12-06-2015 04:26PM

Will I Amnt wrote: »

Are mods mindful of "group reporting"?
Like if the same handful of posters were reporting the same people or set of fans.
I think I've read somewhere or was told that a post that gets reported by more people will be more likely to be actioned.

Being honest, when something is so blatant against the charter it will usually result in several reports.

If its a fast moving match thread however it might only get one or two as the pages and posts rack up pretty quickly and some people miss an offensive post.

Saying something in a superthread is more likely to be seen by more people giving the slower nature of posting in them and thus, giving us more reports.

EDIT : However, theres no campaign of the same 2 or 3 people reporting opposition fans and vice versa, not in a pattern that stands out anyway.

Mickeroo · 12-06-2015 04:28PM

I don't think it happens tbh, or if it does then it's very rare.

GavRedKing · 12-06-2015 04:31PM

People have been pulled up for "spamming" the report button before, its a very rare thing to happen though.

Will I Amnt · 12-06-2015 04:31PM

GavRedKing wrote: »

EDIT : However, theres no campaign of the same 2 or 3 people reporting opposition fans and vice versa, not in a pattern that stands out anyway.

Cheers, it was just something I've always been curious about given the tribal nature of the forum and the cliques that form.

TheDoc · 12-06-2015 04:36PM

Will I Amnt wrote: »

Cheers, it was just something I've always been curious about given the tribal nature of the forum and the cliques that form.

Used to happen a lot in another forum I used to frequent

GavRedKing · 12-06-2015 04:44PM

Will I Amnt wrote: »

Cheers, it was just something I've always been curious about given the tribal nature of the forum and the cliques that form.

Was a good question actually. The more prolific posters tend to report more than newer users but thats down to IMO, the fact theyre more used to the forum and know the charter better and theyre more active.

I'd always implore people to report posts as its our best way to see issues and offensive posts as we dont go in and monitor every single thread, even if something looks trivial or a 50/50 call, its good to report it and we can have a look.

12-06-2015 04:52PM

One rules I'd like introduced is that the first person who mentions or alludes to both United and Liverpool in a match thread not involving them, or a transfer thread involving only other teams should get an instant ban. So annoying following a somewhat interesting discussion for a few dozen posts, coming back the next day to see another posts and they turn out to be about United making Ronaldo the second best player in the world/"our year"/Suarez etc.

Soccer Forum Feedback Thread 2015

Comments