Feedback Thread 2019

redzerdrog · 22-06-2019 8:33pm

If the only issue being Lloyd living rent free in people's head then things mustn't be too bad.

Don't spend as much time here to give proper feedback but find the idea of bias strange as if anyone that is not a Utd fan posts anything remotely negative in the Utd thread, there is toys thrown out of the pram left right and centre

Jurgen The German · 22-06-2019 8:38pm

Will I Am Not wrote: »

Ok so the claim that posters are trying to raze the forum to the ground with massive volumes of targeted post reporting was just wild speculation?
Bizarre stuff altogether, there’s literally nothing tangible to speculate on.

It's a very, VERY specific claim to make and direct at people that posted in here and the help desk thread. It's possible that it was just purely speculative but more often than not, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck. Anyway, it's been addressed so I'll leave it there.

Cantona's Collars · 22-06-2019 8:39pm

noodler wrote: »

Everyone on Lloyd's back about a conspiracy after the forum had to put up with unsubstantiated bull**** for a year about mystery WhatsApp groups.

You do realise that the WhatsApp claim was a joke yet it grew and was propagated by posters and taken as fact by a few. Here you are talking about it as if it was fact,hoodwinked by a joke and using it as a stick to beat posters and try to build up a counter argument which is built on pillars of sand.

jayo26 · 22-06-2019 8:43pm

5starpool wrote: »

Some of the people whinging about conspiracy in this thread too are hardly saints themselves. Alanis Morrisette could write a couple of songs about it, although she'd probably need to improve on her previous examples of irony.

Its a feedback thread where people are looking for feedback on issues. If it doesn't effect you then why have a pop at people calling them whingers.

There was no abuse going on here just people wanting answers and others trying to derail the thread by name calling and other snide comments.

Trigger · 22-06-2019 8:55pm

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

A) It was speculation on my part, based on a few things
unless it has changed over the past few years, reported posts from all forums go into the same place and are viewable by all mods on the site

The rush to believe there is some sort of conspiracy and collective frothing at the mouth is certainly interesting though.

You and I both know that is absolute bullshìt, and the fact it took you so long to reply with this when you could have stated that hours ago is even more cause for concern.

The wording in your original post was in no way speculative.. you stated it as fact

5starpool · 22-06-2019 9:00pm

jayo26 wrote: »

Its a feedback thread where people are looking for feedback on issues. If it doesn't effect you then why have a pop at people calling them whingers.

There was no abuse going on here just people wanting answers and others trying to derail the thread by name calling and other snide comments.

My feedback is that like most claims of conspiracy and cover up, the one alleged by multiple man utd supporters in this thread is bogus.

On my fairly rare forays into the utd thread this season, I have seen a couple of man utd fans slagging Liverpool in their thread in response to posts they thought were made by Liverpool fans, but were actually by Utd fans. There is a level of sensitivity and paranoia by some (not a majority by any means, but a noisy minority) which is rooted in frustration of how poor utd have been which is exacerbated by the fact that Liverpool had a good season and won something.

The point Lloyd and others have made is that Liverpool and Man Utd fans in the main are 2 sides of the same coin, with a similar volume of fans here, and a similar makeup of good posters, bad posters (to their own and other fans points of view), those who love winding up the opposition, and those who are ultra sensitive. However in this thread it is only the utd fans claiming conspiracy.

Go back a few years, and I'm sure it was the other way around with Liverpool fans doing most of the complaining about bias and conspiracy. Strangely enough these things seem to be very much linked to the success of the club fans support and the success of their main rivals.

At the end of the day, none of this matters. I have got wound up on boards at times over the years. I've made stupid posts I have regretted because I got the wrong end of the stick or because I was annoyed by how crap Liverpool were and I let myself get wound up. It's not worth it though, and I hope that this is something that I have largely stopped doing, although I wouldn't totally rule out a reappearance on occasion. I wish people on all sides would wind others up less, but that's a vain hope generally.

5starpool · 22-06-2019 9:03pm

astradave wrote: »

You and I both know that is absolute bullsh and the fact it took you so long to reply with this when you could have stated that hours ago is even more cause for concern.

The wording in your original post was in no way speculative.. you stated it as fact

Again with the conspiracy. Multiple utd fans have mentioned in the early parts of this thread (and in others) about reporting posts and nothing done, and Lloyd's post is probably based on that I'd imagine. I know Lloyd a lot better than you, and that's what I'm basing my opinion of that situation on.

eigrod · 22-06-2019 9:04pm

Iused2likebusts wrote: »

There is no difference between either side about 8 to 10 posters on each side that ultimately love all the drama of this stuff and then complain when it doesn't go there way.

This is all that needs to be said. 8 or 10 altogether I would say. Everyone knows who they are.

Turtyturd · 22-06-2019 9:05pm

martyos121 wrote: »

Haven’t caught up on reading through all of this yet so it may have been mentioned already, but one of the biggest problems in the Liverpool superthread (and I’m sure it happens in others) is a couple of posters, supposedly fellow supporters, consistently targeting a specific few and taking low level, petty jabs at almost everything that they post for seemingly no other reason than to disrupt the thread and shut down certain discussions.

These aren’t controversial posts that are being targeted either, it’s usually unfavourable opinions of certain players or trying to shut down conversations that they aren’t interested in, but again, only a specific few posters are the targets of this. The ignore function usually does nothing for this as those posts are often quoted due to the usually angry and spiteful nature of them.

The problem was much worse back a couple of years ago and it seemed to be dealt with and sanctions were dished out, but it’s been rising again over the past season and it’s not being dealt with.

It’s absolutely normal to disagree with posters on this forum, that’s the basis of any good debate and what keeps the site going, but when it’s a consistent agenda against a few posters in particular (proven by the fact that others who post the very same opinions aren’t even addressed by these posters), it’s quite clear that it’s an intentional thing and that’s a problem that needs to be readdressed IMO.

This isn’t the only problem I have with the forum and from what I’ve read so far, there are plenty of issues I’d echo from other posters, not just from fellow LFC supporters, but this is definitely the one that affects our superthread the most for me so I’d love to see it being addressed and resolved, which it was once before.

Good point. And something I meant to bring up. If someone annoys someone else to the extent that they appear to on the Liverpool thread the easy solution is to just ignore them rather than hanging around waiting for them to post so you can respond to it and constantly drag the whole thread off topic imo

.

The initial mod intervention did seem to stop it for a while but it quickly became clear that they were only interested in taking action against one ‘side’ and it quickly went back to normal.

Also think the above ties into another issue of posters seeming to get a clean slate when they change name/re-reg when they’re on the verge of bans.

Cantona's Collars · 22-06-2019 9:06pm

I'm not going to quote 5starpool's post but that's a load of BS. It's bits of "the company line" mixed with your own opinion.
"United are doing badly so United posters lash out", get a grip. Already there's been posters who tried to trot out the same line that have been caught out.

LuckyLloyd · 22-06-2019 9:15pm

Lads, do you think Dom and I of all people are in on the inside of some sort of boards.ie mods / admin conspiracy? I appreciate some of ye aren’t around here for a decade +; but some of ye are!

Trigger · 22-06-2019 9:17pm

5starpool wrote: »

Again with the conspiracy. Multiple utd fans have mentioned in the early parts of this thread (and in others) about reporting posts and nothing done, and Lloyd's post is probably based on that I'd imagine. I know Lloyd a lot better than you, and that's what I'm basing my opinion of that situation on.

Seriously, can you please explain how a handful of posters mentioning that reported posts not being actioned, bear in mind it was not just one single set of fans saying this equals to "And when that didn’t work have seemingly decided to try and raze the forum to the ground with massive volumes of targeted post reporting"

Trigger · 22-06-2019 9:18pm

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Lads, do you think Dom and I of all people are in on the inside of some sort of boards.ie mods / admin conspiracy? I appreciate some of ye aren’t around here for a decade +; but some of ye are!

Yes, I do believe that you have received information from a mod or admin, I've no idea who now and dont know who Dom is but yes... and I'm the least person that would believe in conspiracies.

I also have concerns about that and that is nothing whatsoever to do with Mod inconsistency or biasism, it's the simple fact of a mod/cmod/admin giving a normal user information like that, as you couldnt tell what other information has been given

pjohnson · 22-06-2019 9:19pm

astradave wrote: »

Seriously, can you please explain how a handful of posters mentioning that reported posts not being actioned, bear in mind it was not just one single set of fans saying this equals to "And when that didn’t work have seemingly decided to try and raze the forum to the ground with massive volumes of targeted post reporting"

This (made up idea) seems to be the only conspiracy.

22-06-2019 9:23pm

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

Inconsistency. It's no surprise it's sunshine and lollipops from a group of supporters who follow a trophy winning team and death and despair from their rivals who won nothing but it shouldn't mask how reported posts are dealt with, or ignored.

Active mods are the ones actioning contentious posts, so they're the ones in the firing line which is unfair. Maybe a list of how many mod actions each mod took this season might be useful.

Also, it seems there has there been more day to day moderation from Cat Mods and Admins than previously? If the season has been so calm and quiet, why are they the ones doing the moderation.

Either dump the charter or moderate to it would be my suggestion.

jayo26 wrote: »

INCONSISTENCIES.

Why is one poster barred from using a super thread and warned about using the thank button as a tool to try wind up other supporters but another is poster is doing it freely.

Why are abusive post against a player or public person jumped on straight away (and rightly so) for some people but not for others even tho they are reported.

Why is any attempt of people trying to express their views on how poor the soccer forums are run and moderated always shut down and brushed aside as a fanbaseof sore lose even tho we can clearly see that supporters from various teams have expressed concerns in the help desk over past 12 months.

Why was last year's feedback thread not followed up on it was just closed with no feedback giving afterwards.

Why has the soccer forums got to a state that people are going around making up fake profiles just so they can abuse other users via private message as much as possible before it's banned.

The boards soccer forum has turned into a disgusting place to post in most other boards communities they have rules and they are followed and policied but in the soccer forums we have mods ignoring complaints and questions of clarification and shutting down users looking for answers and brushing them aside and its all down to mods been allowed use the excuse of common sense modding.

Common sense modding doesn't work in soccer forums because it's tribal it goes beyond being impartial and it's allowed ruin an entire section of boards.

I fully expect this feedback thread to go like last year.... A lot of posters complaining and a lot to other posters trying to shut them down and claim all is fine and dandy. The thread will be closed in a weeks time and filed away beside last year's thread.

For that reason I'm out.

Will I Am Not wrote: »

The Man United superthread was as bad as I’ve ever seen it up until the last couple of months. It has improved a bit after a few long overdue forum/thread bans.
It’s no coincidence that all came about during a period where there was no United supporting moderator on the team.

That will be brushed off as irrelevant and I’ll be told that there’s no mod bias when there clearly is but aside from that, there’s no mod that has a feel for that thread. The 2 Liverpool mods know how the Liverpool thread works, the in-jokes, the posters that are slagging each other or players in an amicable way, they can see the posters that are constantly riling up their fellow supporters but staying between the lines of the charter. Same goes for the 2 Arsenal mods and the Chelsea mod and the Spurs mod.

All the other fast moving superthreads have one or two mods. The two busiest (excluding the United thread) have two.
There is nobody on the mod team that regularly contributes to the United thread and nobody that has a feel for how it runs, so then you get mods only really coming in when there’s a reported post and taking that in isolation, often being too lenient or too harsh.

An admin tried to step in to fill the gap a few months ago just to be seen to be doing something and that just epitomised the whole point of this post. He put a rival poster up on a pedestal by making him an example of how rival fans should post in a superthread and then thread banned him soon after. I’m not having a go at the admin, it’s just a perfect example of how out of touch with the thread someone can be if they don’t participate.

The busy threads in soccer have more posts per day than many complete fora across the site that have numerous mods and category mods to oversee them.

Many users have stopped using the United thread, I’ve been chatting to them on other platforms and they all feel it’s gone to sh*te. I’m sure this will try to be passed off as United not doing well and people are leaving and only complaining because of that but there’s been much worse seasons than this in recent memory.

Lord TSC wrote: »

Think Will I Am's post hit several nails on the head.

To echo though, I'm a big fan of the thread bans that cropped up a few weeks back, and I think as a result of targeting four or five repeat offenders, the whole CL thing barely registered in the United thread, beyond genuine discussions about how it affected us. I'd be a big fan of seeing more of that sort of thing, hitting repeat offenders to help facilitate discussions. The overwhealming vast majority of posters seem to detest the inter-thread taunting, and the fact a thread ban against half a dozen people facilitated a decrease in that behavious is proof that it can be tackled, if there's a will to.

I also wanted to note that the level of soapboxing has dropped drastically in the last few weeks. "Soapboxing" was a massive, massive issue in the United thread this season, with a very small handful of posters utterly refusing to talk about anything but one or two subjects, and continually making sure any other arguments were either dragged in or drowned out. Having 10,000 posts about one subject, going round and round and round, is incredibly tedious and damaging to facilitating discussions. I've voiced my frustrations with everything being condensed into a single "superthread" before, but this season seemed to be the worst yet for struggling to have multiple discussions going simultaneously.

I also do not believe it's a coincidence that this issue resolved itself when one regular user got a lengthy ban, and two others with very similar traits vanished nearly simultaneously, and I'd be really hoping the mods and admins saw their actions had a real benefit on the thread itself. In way of feedback, I would really like to see mods and admins come crashing down on serial soapboxers, who very obviously have no real desire to engage in good faith discussions (and that's being kind; my own personal take is that many are doing it as a form of low level trolling, cause they can get away with it so freely....)

astradave wrote: »

All abuse of players/managers should be a yellow card offence per the soccer forum charter. Abuse of users should be a Red card offence.

This rule is probably one of the most inconsistently applied rules on the forum. When in essence it should be black and white. There was previously an update from a feedback thread that allows leeway during matches, due to the immediate emotional reaction, this should be done away with. Anyone that opens boards, clicks reply to a thread, writes a post, (probably checks for errors) and clicks posts could not be deemed an immediate emotional reaction. There should be absolutely no leeway with regards to any form of abuse.

The problem in the SF, and across Boards as a whole is the level of consistency in moderation and implementation of the charters, and while we cannot expect mods to be on at all times due to having real lives we should expect that the report post feature is looked at and actioned if deemed in breach when they do come on be it a couple of hours/days later. One problem seems to be that as the mods have not been active for a couple of hours/days that the conversations have passed and the threads have moved on so they seem to leave the posts from this time unactioned.

Fred The Red wrote: »

You were banned from the Utd thread for trolling

I doubt you are in any position to call anyone a hypocrite

As for inconsistencies ref these threads within only one year, and look who is in the thread attempting to derail multiple posters sharing concerns. Same moderator keeps popping up too. Multiple posters who support multiple teams.

Inconsistent and biased moderation in the soccer forum (148)

https://touch.boards.ie/thread/post/109048018

https://touch.boards.ie/thread/post/109951899

https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057961269/1/#post109633344

https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057962439/1/#post109622723

https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057916393/1

Require anymore evidence?

Jurgen The German wrote: »

Are mods actually going to answer questions about the state of the forum or is this just another back slapping, box ticking exercise?

When I say mods, I don't mean Cmods or Admins, I mean the actual forum mods, the ones that are supposed to mod the forum.

jaykay74 wrote: »

1/ Yellow card for trolling should be automatic thread ban for poster.

2/ 2 yellow cards for trolling in superthreads should be permanent ban from said superthread. Due to point 1 this would obviously be after returning in next iteration of superthread.

A version of this has cleaned up the obvious trolls from the utd superthread recently. (but my point is a general point, not towards any thread or superthread)

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

Appreciate what you you're saying about having a United supporting mod, but if mods left "their" team/interest threads more often and just moderated reported posts as they receive them from whatever thread/poster, you wouldn't have the active mods (who happen to support rival teams) actioning posts all the time, and being viewed as biased as a result.*

The team they support really shouldn't matter, the in jokes shouldn't matter, whether you understand them or not shouldn't matter, if they meet the charter they're okay, if they don't, then moderate them. (which could mean discussing the post with a poster, or deletion, or carding it)

*that was a very long sentence which despite my best efforts I couldn't shorten.

Will I Am Not wrote: »

See that’s the thing, the charter is black and white one day and grey the next.

pjohnson wrote: »

Repeated butchering of the quotes feature aswell. You need to have a certain amount of posts before you can get access to soccer. Mangled quotes are just a huge block of text that makes no sense as the attempted quote blends with the response.

pjohnson wrote: »

Agree. The removal of consistent soapboxers helped discussion massively.

bucketybuck wrote: »

I would suggest that your opinion on this topic appears to have been very clearly stated, and we understand your feelings on the matter.

I await a mods opinion on my question.

The above is probably the most relevant feedback to the moderation team. Not some bull**** about conspiracy theories.

Again it seems that some are desperate to derail what should be considered shared concerns from a large portion of the soccer forum and not just Utd fans.

Where are the actual moderators? And no not the admins and cat mods covering for them.

LuckyLloyd · 22-06-2019 9:24pm

astradave wrote: »

Yes, I do believe that you have received information from a mod or admin, I've no idea who now and dont know who Dom is but yes... and I'm the least person that would believe in conspiracies.

Dom is 5starpool. No, I don’t have a mod / admin passing info to me (that idea is absurd frankly). But the reaction to my speculation certainly makes me feel it was close to the mark!!

eigrod · 22-06-2019 9:30pm

Fred The Red wrote: »

The above is probably the most relevant feedback to the moderation team. Not some bull**** about conspiracy theories.

Again it seems that some are desperate to derail what should be considered shared concerns from a large portion of the soccer forum and not just Utd fans.

Where are the actual moderators? And no not the admins and cat mods covering for them.

“Everybody who agrees with me is right, everybody else is wrong and Moderators need to deal with everybody else”. You’re even quoting your own posts.

Ffs

yabadabado · 22-06-2019 9:32pm

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Dom is 5starpool. No, I don’t have a mod / admin passing info to me (that idea is absurd frankly). But the reaction to my speculation certainly makes me feel it was close to the mark!!

Only took you about 5 hours to reply .Good lad .

SM01 · 22-06-2019 9:41pm

So folk aren't supposed to have a life outside boards? Well feck me sideways. There's seemingly a desperation to pin something, anything, on Lloyd.

pjohnson · 22-06-2019 9:44pm

SM01 wrote: »

So folk aren't supposed to have a life outside boards? Well fûck me sideways.

Well fűck me sideways too mate. He was having his life outside boards while posting on boards for about an hour while being asked the same question multiple times during that period?

The desperation to use fantasy to deny on site facts is amazing.

martyos121 · 22-06-2019 9:47pm

To ask a question of a poster, get the answer and then moan about a delay of a few hours just because they didn’t like the truth, perfectly sums up the tone of this thread. Shîte like this will get the thing closed early and then the real problems will be ignored for another year, just like last time.

A certain level of discussion is needed here, but this is essentially a witch hunt at this point and it’s gone well beyond what most would consider “feedback”.

yabadabado · 22-06-2019 9:47pm

SM01 wrote: »

So folk aren't supposed to have a life outside boards? Well feck me sideways. There's seemingly a desperation to pin something, anything, on Lloyd.

Of course they are but you might want to look back on the thread before posting nonsense.
He was on line and posting replies to other posts but for some reason couldn't reply to that for a few hours.

SM01 · 22-06-2019 9:49pm

pjohnson wrote: »

SM01 wrote: »

So folk aren't supposed to have a life outside boards? Well fûck me sideways.

Well fűck me sideways too mate. He was having his life outside boards while posting on boards for about an hour while being asked the same question multiple times during that period?

Is this a trial of Lloyd or a feedback thread? He's not obliged to answer anyone, nevermind doing it within a timeframe that suits others. Yet posters got an answer and because they didn't get the answer they want they're still baying for blood.

Necro · 22-06-2019 9:54pm

Wasn't gonna comment personally myself as the usual back and forth has begun but just re: Humour Thread

Jurgen The German wrote: »

The humour thread serves a purpose and is easy to avoid if you dont want to read it. There is some funny stuff in it if you wade through the united liverpool BS.

Best thing that could be done for the forum would be to turn off the thanks function. That's the root of alot of the crap. It's possible to do as the likes of the helpdesk and the thunderdome (RIP) had it switched off.

alchemist33 wrote: »

Sometimes there is some funny stuff in there but you have to risk wading through a lot of shyte score-settling to get to it. I rarely bother now

I don't see the point in keeping a thread open if it's being used for points scoring by groups of fans tbh.

'Wading through' a thread shouldn't have to happen imo. Just shut it down and burn it with fire if it's being used in that manner.

Turtyturd · 22-06-2019 10:00pm

One of the main posters looking for an answer from Lloyd posted the following a while back...

One small thing before the thread is closed is the issue of some posters who are habitually reporting posts ad nauseum,I won't go dragging up the issues we had before with certain posters using other media to basically set up posters and report them on this site but it still seems that a certain few just live to report every little thing then thank each other's posts.

...perhaps they might be able to provide a satisfactory explanation as to how average posters are finding out who is reporting posts.

Cantona's Collars · 22-06-2019 10:01pm

martyos121 wrote: »

To ask a question of a poster, get the answer and then moan about a delay of a few hours just because they didn’t like the truth, perfectly sums up the tone of this thread. Shîte like this will get the thing closed early and then the real problems will be ignored for another year, just like last time.

A certain level of discussion is needed here, but this is essentially a witch hunt at this point and it’s gone well beyond what most would consider “feedback”.

No witch hunt. He made a claim which put him and mods in a poor light and eventually came up with an explanation that makes John Delaney look like a font of information.
We'll leave this topic alone because as per the last feedback thread the same few are dragging it off topic by pretending everything is fine and deriding every post and poster who says different.

5starpool · 22-06-2019 10:13pm

So the truth is that Lloyd has insider information and any attempt to say that he was speculating based on things he has read over the last few months is a bogus excuse.

I'd like to ask those who are so convinced of this how they got their information? Is the person who is feeding Lloyd information feeding counter information about the information they are feeding?

It is my opinion that he isn't being given actual information, but of course he could be. I'd rate the chances at less than 1% though that I'm wrong.

BillyHasMates · 22-06-2019 10:14pm

Any of the "neutrals" wish to contribute? ðŸ˜

jayo26 · 22-06-2019 10:15pm

Turtyturd wrote: »

One of the main posters looking for an answer from Lloyd posted the following a while back...

...perhaps they might be able to provide a satisfactory explanation as to how average posters are finding out who is reporting posts.

Perhaps if you had to of read down that thread a fews posts you may of seen he answered it four years ago...

So your going so far to put this years feedback thread off track you are searching posts and quoting them from a four year old thread.

redzerdrog · 22-06-2019 10:35pm

I think the idea of getting rid of the charter should be explored so many debates and arguments arise due to different interpretation of rules.

Just have one rule of don't be a dickhead

pjohnson · 22-06-2019 10:42pm

redzerdrog wrote: »

I think the idea of getting rid of the charter should be explored so many debates and arguments arise due to different interpretation of rules.

Just have one rule of don't be a dickhead

This would be good.

Trigger · 22-06-2019 10:44pm

redzerdrog wrote: »

I think the idea of getting rid of the charter should be explored so many debates and arguments arise due to different interpretation of rules.

Just have one rule of don't be a dickhead

Don't be a dick is a standard boards rule anyways, but how would you enforce it in the SF without "subrules", there is already accusations of mod bias/inconsistency, that single rule would leave it even worse unfortunately. It would leave it at the hands of the the mod who is looking at the post. Each mod could interpret the same words differently under that rule.

The whole point of the charter sets out clearly yellow and red card offences, if the charter was followed to the letter of the law it would cut out 99% of the ****e that goes on and make the SF as a whole better for it.

Threadbans, which have popped up recently, is also the way to go. But a threadban on say the United or pool thread could be anything between a week and a month depending on the time of the year, but could be up to 5 years on say the Newcastle or Sheffield Wednesday thread. if you are banned from posting in in a thread that should be enforced for at least 6months at which point you apply for access stating your case to the mod team to post in that thread again.

This is it · 22-06-2019 10:46pm

There are calls for a black and white charter, which in itself is impossible because not all scenarios can be covered. There are also calls for no charter, which I also think is impossible. Posters need something to keep them between the lines and mods need something to show posters where the lines are.

No charter, no lines = mayhem.

pjohnson · 22-06-2019 10:48pm

astradave wrote: »

Don't be a dick is a standard boards rule anyways, but how would you enforce it in the SF without "subrules", there is already accusations of mod bias/inconsistency, that single rule would leave it even worse unfortunately. It would leave it at the hands of the the mod who is looking at the post. Each mod could interpret the same words differently under that rule.

The whole point of the charter sets out clearly yellow and red card offences, if the charter was followed to the letter of the law it would cut out 99% of the ****e that goes on and make the SF as a whole better for it.

Threadbans, which have popped up recently, is also the way to go. But a threadban on say the United or pool thread could be anything between a week and a month depending on the time of the year, but could be up to 5 years on say the Newcastle or Sheffield Wednesday thread. if you are banned from posting in in a thread that should be enforced for at least 6months at which point you apply for access stating your case to the mod team to post in that thread again.

Yeah I used to think thread bans were definite. I mean if you've trolled/wummed the thread to such a degree you got banned why on earth can you be trusted to post there again?

Peatys · 22-06-2019 10:49pm

redzerdrog wrote: »

I think the idea of getting rid of the charter should be explored so many debates and arguments arise due to different interpretation of rules.

Just have one rule of don't be a dickhead

2 rules. Don't be a dickhead, and don't take it too seriously

pjohnson · 22-06-2019 10:49pm

This is it wrote: »

There are calls for a black and white charter, which in itself is impossible because not all scenarios can be covered. There are also calls for no charter, which I also think is impossible. Posters need something to keep them between the lines and mods need something to show posters where the lines are.

No charter, no lines = mayhem.

Well the half charter with half lines sure as hell isn't working. The wild inconsistency is the most mentioned thing so either more active mods needed to enforce the charter or less rules for the active mods to enforce.

5starpool · 22-06-2019 10:51pm

pjohnson wrote: »

Yeah I used to think thread bans were definite. I mean if you've trolled/wummed the thread to such a degree you got banned why on earth can you be trusted to post there again?

The alternative would have been a temporary forum ban which would see people generally able to post much quicker than a 2 super thread length ban. If any of the transgressors are found to be doing the same thing after being allowed to post again I'd expect the next punishment to be a permanent thread ban from all successive threads of the same nature.

DM_7 · 22-06-2019 10:56pm

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

No, I am not permanently banned. My thread ban expires at the conclusion of the current Utd thread

This might be the best reason for United fans to stop posting then.

A thread ban does not go far enough when a poster just has to wait out a 10k ir other post thread limit (while allowed to continue posting elsewhere) before continuing on as normal. Thread bans should be for a significant period of time.

This is it · 22-06-2019 10:58pm

pjohnson wrote: »

Well the half charter with half lines sure as hell isn't working. The wild inconsistency is the most mentioned thing so either more active mods needed to enforce the charter or less rules for the active mods to enforce.

More mods with more discussion on appropriate action maybe. More mods does lighten the load for others but it also leads to more inconsistent modding because, well... they aren't robots, human nature that they'll react somewhat differently. More mods means more opinions and interpretations of the charter.

One thing I will say that needs to be stamped out, which raises it's ugly head in almost every thread in the forum, is the Liverpool v United bullshît. There is banter to be had but more often than not, at any given time, you'll have a handful of posters from either camp doing their level best to wind up the other. It's as obvious as a kick to the face but seems to be let fester.

Tougher action on the WUMs.

pjohnson · 22-06-2019 10:58pm

5starpool wrote: »

The alternative would have been a temporary forum ban which would see people generally able to post much quicker than a 2 super thread length ban. If any of the transgressors are found to be doing the same thing after being allowed to post again I'd expect the next punishment to be a permanent thread ban from all successive threads of the same nature.

I dont see why it isnt a instant ban from all successive threads. If you've trolled the topic that repeatedly to that degree you shouldn't be allowed repost on said topic. That "punishment" is quite meaningless as depending on club in question it could be a 3 month ban or a 6 year ban. Plus the obvious fact the wumming/trolling can just restart again completely defeating the purpose.

LuckyLloyd · 22-06-2019 11:00pm

DM_7 wrote: »

This might be the best reason for United fans to stop posting then.

A thread ban does not go far enough when a poster just has to wait out a 10k thread limit (while allowed to continue posting elsewhere) before continuing on as normal. Thread bans should be for a significant period of time.

It will have been 3 months+ by the time the current thread is finished. Boards doesn't move as quick as it used to.

beno619 · 22-06-2019 11:01pm

giveitholly wrote: »

In the run up to the United home game to Liverpool the Liverpool thread had to be closed because of posters coming in having the 'banter'. It goes on in both threads from a minority so no point putting all the blame on Liverpool posters,there are a few on both sides only looking to troll plus an arsenal supporter who only ever seems to post in the Liverpool thread about how much he hates Liverpool

You don't have to tell me, you should respond to the guys that says he doesn't see it.

5starpool · 22-06-2019 11:05pm

pjohnson wrote: »

I dont see why it isnt a instant ban from all successive threads. If you've trolled the topic that repeatedly to that degree you shouldn't be allowed repost on said topic. That "punishment" is quite meaningless as depending on club in question it could be a 3 month ban or a 6 year ban. Plus the obvious fact the wumming/trolling can just restart again completely defeating the purpose.

Why shouldn't all bans be permanent then?

Bobeagleburger · 22-06-2019 11:10pm

The witch hunt against Lloyd is pretty ridiculous. Grown men crying conspiracy. The mods OPs rules didn't last long eh

Bobeagleburger · 22-06-2019 11:14pm

5starpool good posting. Need a name change though man!

22-06-2019 11:14pm

This is it wrote: »

More mods with more discussion on appropriate action maybe. More mods does lighten the load for others but it also leads to more inconsistent modding because, well... they aren't robots, human nature that they'll react somewhat differently.

One thing I will say that needs to be stamped out, which raises it's ugly head in almost every thread in the forum, is the Liverpool v United bullshît. There is banter to be had but more often than not, at any given time, you'll have a handful of posters from either camp doing their level best to wind up the other. It's as obvious as a kick to the face but seems to be let fester.

Tougher action on the WUMs.

You have to look at the biggest followings and like it or lump it its Utd & Liverpool fans.

It only leads to inconstancy when one mod pops out of the blue into a thread they have little to no interaction with for months and then slap the cards out.

Meanwhile the same moderators who are actively participating in the Liverpool thread and have a clear line of the day to day discussions on that thread act completely different to that of the threads they are so isolated from.

An Admin and Cat Mod has had to step in to try and sort out the Utd thread multiple times because of this.

Then folks continue to push the narrative of 'witch hunt' and 'conspiracy bolox' when there are huge amount of posters voicing concerns of inconsistency further fueling the wind up and bitterness.

An active mod in the Utd thread like the regular posters who participate in it regularly is required in order to moderate it properly to the equivalent of that of the Liverpool threads.

This isn't that big of a request. If the current mods who follow Liverpool are not going to do it then vote someone else with a clean record who is an active member of one of the biggest soccer threads on the forum.

pjohnson · 22-06-2019 11:15pm

5starpool wrote: »

Why shouldn't all bans be permanent then?

Agree why aren't they. Bans should be permanent for the same reason as I said earlier. If you are a big enough thick to get banned then tough shíte to ya dont come back you are banned. Seems fair to me you get chances and warnings before you get yourself banned.

I will however say that its good that the yellow cards at least have their own cumulative system that is clearly defined so thats good in that it shows actions have definite consequences no grey makey uppey stuff (this is where the problems lie). Right up to 6 month ban + re apply - I'd refuse the re-application because poster clearly cant be trusted imo but not my decision.

Thread bans just seem completely useless. It varys from 3 months (United thread) to 5 years (Newcastle thread) to 10 years (Sunderland thread).
So troll the Sunderland thread = 10 year thread ban, troll United thread = 3 month thread ban??? That doesnt seem right or consistent yet both banned would be trolls/wums.
Ideally troll any club thread = permaban from that clubs threads. Now thats consistent and will stop regular trolls/wums appearing.

22-06-2019 11:16pm

RoboKlopp wrote: »

5starpool good posting. Need a name change though man!

Good point. Can a mod clarify the rule around calling out a poster by their old username please?

Agent Coulson · 22-06-2019 11:17pm

martyos121 wrote: »

Haven’t caught up on reading through all of this yet so it may have been mentioned already, but one of the biggest problems in the Liverpool superthread (and I’m sure it happens in others) is a couple of posters, supposedly fellow supporters, consistently targeting a specific few and taking low level, petty jabs at almost everything that they post for seemingly no other reason than to disrupt the thread and shut down certain discussions.

These aren’t controversial posts that are being targeted either, it’s usually unfavourable opinions of certain players or trying to shut down conversations that they aren’t interested in, but again, only a specific few posters are the targets of this. The ignore function usually does nothing for this as those posts are often quoted due to the usually angry and spiteful nature of them.

The problem was much worse back a couple of years ago and it seemed to be dealt with and sanctions were dished out, but it’s been rising again over the past season and it’s not being dealt with.

It’s absolutely normal to disagree with posters on this forum, that’s the basis of any good debate and what keeps the site going, but when it’s a consistent agenda against a few posters in particular (proven by the fact that others who post the very same opinions aren’t even addressed by these posters), it’s quite clear that it’s an intentional thing and that’s a problem that needs to be readdressed IMO.

This isn’t the only problem I have with the forum and from what I’ve read so far, there are plenty of issues I’d echo from other posters, not just from fellow LFC supporters, but this is definitely the one that affects our superthread the most for me so I’d love to see it being addressed and resolved, which it was once before.

One more thing actually; reporting posts has become 99% pointless, especially this season. Either action the reported posts consistently or at the very least, mods shouldn’t delete posts that have clearly breached the charter. Posters and lurkers deserve to know if a post has been sanctioned or not, and even if deleted posts have been carded and dealt with privately, nobody can see that apart the culprit so there are fewer examples on-thread of what isn’t acceptable to post in this forum (which seems to vary depending on which mod is active, thus making the charter redundant). This one absolutely does my head in tbh.

Turtyturd wrote: »

Good point. And something I meant to bring up. If someone annoys someone else to the extent that they appear to on the Liverpool thread the easy solution is to just ignore them rather than hanging around waiting for them to post so you can respond to it and constantly drag the whole thread off topic imo .

The initial mod intervention did seem to stop it for a while but it quickly became clear that they were only interested in taking action against one ‘side’ and it quickly went back to normal.

Also think the above ties into another issue of posters seeming to get a clean slate when they change name/re-reg when they’re on the verge of bans.

Agree with both of the above posts.

Trigger · 22-06-2019 11:18pm

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

It will have been 3 months+ by the time the current thread is finished. Boards doesn't move as quick as it used to.

Mainly because you were banned for 1.5 threads so it's not really that bad, plus a lot of the soapboxing that had been going on previously in the threads has been cut out.

5starpool wrote: »

Why shouldn't all bans be permanent then?

I would always think that threadbans would more be for repeat offenders, people who have showed that they continue to wind up threads over a longer duration and while they might not accumulate yellows, they could be doing various things from low level trolling to soapboxing continuously. Its tedious. Basically what I would put forward here is a system that means if you are thread banned you would be banned for at least 6 months from posting in that thread and threads of the same name and when that time is up, you need to apply and state your case to the mod team. If threadbanned again it's a permanent threadban.

Feedback Thread 2019

Comments