Soccer forum warning

Sound, thanks B.

Thanks Steve. I'm challenging the allegation that "mangling a name for comedic effect" is against the forum charter.

See below.

https://www.boards.ie/search/submit/?sort=best&date_to=&date_from=&query=Baby+keith&forum=151

There's 30 odd examples of "mangling a name for comedic effect" and not one of them were actioned, and rightly so, why would the be, same as my post.

There has been one user in particular, that has defended Paul Pogba and his performances to such an extent that they were thread banned the other evening. Many people, myself included were sick to death of it. Someone commented that Giggs, who is long retired, should be played as he would make an effort unlike some. The amendment of the name to Small Frogba was done so as to avoid naming him directly and in turn, avoid having the aforementioned user appear to defend him again. It's obvious I was talking about Pogba so it was an in joke of sorts.

I also challenge the allegation that using frog is some sort of a slur based on the players nationality. As I said in my opening pm to the mod, if I had said dog, log or any other rhyming word would that be ok, considering "mangling names for comedic effect" is not actionable, at least when it comes to others.

I am of the opinion that the mod in question saw an opportunity to card me based on a grudge / dislike they have towards me and they took it. I don't care if someone does not like me nor do I care if I get carded, if it's warranted, but in this instance I sincerely believe that I have been wronged which is why I'm here wasting your time.

Steve wrote: »

The search result you posted above refers (I assume) to Naby Keita. The 'Baby Keith' meme has been all over the internet for over a year and it seems was born from an unintended autocorrect error. Other variations of autocorrect are 'Baby Keira', 'Many Keira', 'Navy Keira', 'Navy Keith' etc depending on the device it is typed on.

I cannot see how that compares to what you posted, there is no way that you can claim 'Paul Pogba' can autocorrect to 'Small Frogba'. You invented it, you even admit to that.

I'm not saying it is acceptable or condoned, it does not wash as a defense for what you posted.

I also cannot accept that using a play on 'Frog' for a French player is a mere rhyming coincidence, it was deliberate.

To refer to the SF charter, the relevant part is here (emphasis mine):


As to your claim that you are being unfairly targeted by the mod, so far this year you have had 4 mod actions by 3 different mods so I'm not seeing a pattern of targeting here. One of the actions was for a similar post where you referred to 'Adolf Mourinho' in breach of the same section of the charter.

Unless you have anything else to add, I cannot see that the mod was out of line with the warning.

Steve, Im failing to see precisely how Small Frogba can be construed as being offensive / derogatory / abusive. If I had said he was a french prick or something to that effect then fair enough but Small Frogba is blatantly a rhyming pun. It is the mod in question taking something and using the most literal application of the charter in order to card me and inferring a racial / ethnic slur was at play in order to back up their card. There is very obviously no balance when it comes to me. There is no common sense approach taken when it comes to this mod.

In the last few days alone a referee was referred to as "a bent fcuk", a poster told me to "get to fcuk" and questioned whether I was "chatting out of my arse", a poster made jokes about a players sexuality, all of these would be against the charter if literal application was applied but none of them are actioned.

I have not reported them as they do not bother me, we are all grown ups so a bit of foul language is not the end of the world but carding me for something as innocuous as my post is laughable and it is nothing short of bullying by that mod and them abusing their power.

As for my previous record in the forum, since March of this year I have received 5 cards in the SF, one from Turtwig which was rescinded, one from Mickeroo and three from the carding mod here.

The one where I referred to Jose as "Adolf" was explained, below is the quote from Beasty in relation to it

I fully accept there was no malicious intent behind the comment, but that is only because I know you are a United fan.

It was accepted that there was nothing behind it so I held and still hold the opinion that it should have been rescinded but as the admins view is final there was nothing more I could do.

I do not agree that "Small Frogba" is abusive and I categorically refute the claim that it had anything to do with his nationality.

Steve wrote: »

I've already pointed out the relevant section of the forum charter that deems your post to be 'abuse'.

As I said, Im genuinely failing to see how its abusive so we will just have to agree to disagree.


I see no such inference in the correspondence you posted.

"calling a French person Frog anything is out of line"

How can the above not be seen as stating there was an ethnic / racial / nationality slant to my post?




This has no bearing on your appeal. Had you reported these posts at the time and no action was taken then maybe it would have strengthened your case, you didn't feel offended enough at the time to bring them to the attention of the mods so I'm not going to consider them now.

With the greatest respect, policing the forum is not my job. I also have little faith in the reporting system however I did take your point on board and on Saturday evening I reported a post that taken in the literal as per the charter should be carded, it as yet though has not been. One set of rules for the literal application of the charter for some people, another set of rules for others.

Bullying, however, is a serious accusation and will be looked into. I will flag this concern with the admins. Please have evidence of this to hand as I'm sure they will be in contact.

I feel I am being unfairly targeted by this mod. The post that was carded here was made early afternoon but was not carded until half 10 or so that night. I know how the reported posts forum works and other forum mods were active in the 8 or 9 hours between the time it was posted and carded and none of them chose to action it however TFTF did. So is it a case of everyone being out of step but him? This mod has form with carding posters from a certain demographic for the most preposterous of reasons and for reasons Im not going to go into publicly, I feel the bullseye is now on my back. I am more than happy to provide further details off thread.


Your record in SF this year (excluding the current card) is as follows:

14/04/2018 Warning - Thanx 4 The Fish - this was the "Adolf" post, I still believe that was wrong which is why I appealed it
27/05/2018 Warning - Mickeroo
27/05/2018 Warning & Automatic 2 week ban due to points system - Thanx 4 The Fish - these two, fair cop, I acted the bollox and was carded, I didnt appeal them as I deserved the cards.
16/09/2018 Ban (One Day) - Turtwig - this was for a chat post in the humour thread so not exactly mental stuff from me.

I do not count reversed cards in anyone's record.



That's fair enough. I've looked at it and applied the forum rules and find it is in breach. The fact that you don't agree with the rule is not a defense.

I don't see any reason here to overturn the mod warning, card upheld.

You may appeal this to admin as is part of the process if you wish. Please let me know.

I wish to appeal to an admin as I am not happy with the card.

Thanks for your time Steve.

Beasty wrote: »

OK, I'll have a look at this

Firstly, Business Cat, do you accept that "frog" is considered an abusive term when referring to anyone who is French?

Cheers Beasty. Yes, frog would be known to be an insult to French people however I didn't call him a frog eg, Paul the Frog.

It was a rhyming pun only, it was literally the first thing that came to mind and as Ive asked above, if Id used any other rhyming word would we be having the conversation we now are?

Perhaps, but if I'm going to insult someone then I'll be a hell alot more creative than something as base as the nationality / race card however, I can guess that the line of questioning is going to lead to the conclusion that as there is an appearance of guilt ie frog forms part of the spelling, and the player is French, then the card stands, that about it?

Sound, it is what it is and the glaring inconsistencies of how different users are treated will continue unabated, such is boards.

Thanks Steve and Beasty for reviewing.