Abuse.

[thfcsteff]

Steff, i have taken your advice on board and value your post(s) probably the most out of any within this thread..

I was just trying to be funny, i won't quit my day job any time soon haha.

I'm not trying to have a stab at you man.

Take care.

Fair dos mate, sorry if I mis-read it...

 

[WookieD]

Fair dos mate, sorry if I mis-read it...

Misread this bitch

 

[papaspur]

stick your smilies

they're broken
.

 

[mick cooper]

What about Mick Cooper?

Up to my eyeballs in points for criticising and cyberbullying a poster who has me on ignore (and being unrepentant) - The equivalent of abusing a deaf mute with semaphore flags I guess

Oh and for telling someone who had been trying to wind me up all day, who topped it off by telling me to fudge off and post elsewhere - that he could fudge off.

70

oh and 0/3, I don't know what the pass mark is, but I think I'm way off the pace.

 

[THFC]

lets go all lasseiz faire

 

[papaspur]

stick your smilies

they're broken
.

Actually, those smilies triggered my browser's malware warning, so seriously, stick your smilies

 

[Golfball]

so first off, i am not trying to undermine or cause any dissent here, but i wanted to try and gauge the general GG populous' opinion on current moderation. specifically re: 'perceived abuse.'

this is a message i received from a moderator recently who i won't name, as i'm not trying to turn this into a witch hunt, i just want to see if the general user-base (even other mods) find this heavy-handed, as i certainly do or did.

"I'm sorry that you feel like that. If you intended the posts to be received as tongue in cheek, you should have made it clear that was how they were intended. I think that the posts below overstep the line.

Originally Posted by raboner
WTF is your deal man? are you in fact JJetset? Jordinho Jetset?

Originally Posted by raboner
that's why you post all his tweets isn't it? self promoting son of a b*tch.

I have seen several posts today where you have had a dig at the mods. If I see you do this on the board again, I will issue you with further infraction points and you will serve a one week ban or longer."

WOW i thought. the posts i made were directed at Jordinho and made as a light-hearted jibe at the lameness of ITK and at his insistance of posting and defending their drivel.. as far as i know, i am not the only poster to have a dig at some of the more ludicrous ITK offerings.

personally, i feel that if Jordinho was offended by these posts (i'm not quite sure how that's possible to be honest) he should have contacted me rather than having me receive a one-day ban and further infraction points.

as i've mentioned, i'm not trying to undermine anyone and i accept the punishments put in place, i just want to see how my fellow GGers would feel if they were banned for a day then threatened with further weeks banning for daring to question the authoritah! of some of our moderators.

peace!

Funny I got a 1 day ban yesterday and thought of this thread. I called someone a chav who had called me a taco and said they would love to hit me. The word chav has a meaning - normally associated with anti social behaviour, the behaviour which the clown who threatened me from behind his pc was displaying.

First thing I thought of was this thread, and not surprised to see Jordinho named in your opening post -the same mod who banned me. Seems he lets his personal feelings towards posters get in the way of moderating the forum in a fair way. Quite clearly I did nothing wrong, ive said fair worse on here and never even had a mod bat an eyelid. If my response to the provocation I received counts as abuse, then I could report about 50 posts per day on here.

Jordinho - you may not miss me, but im quite sure there are some decent posters that will be put off this site if this sort of moderation is kept up.

 

[Golfball]

Oh and Leedspur - I came here to tell you the good news that I'm catching you up and I see that you are also banned.

Safe for all the religious labour voters to return to the board for a few weeks at least.

 

[southstand1882]

Oh and Leedspur - I came here to tell you the good news that I'm catching you up and I see that you are also banned.

Safe for all the religious labour voters to return to the board for a few weeks at least.

Oh no its not

You'll feel planet smilies wrath if you get lippy

 

[Golfball]

Oh no its not

You'll feel planet smilies wrath if you get lippy

My browser wont load them and warns me not to trust this site every time I read the thread because of planet smilies.

 

[southstand1882]

fudge knows what's going on

The mobile site is brick now too

Some jabroni has decided to take up 25% of my phones screen with a stupid fudging banner

 

[thfcsteff]

Oh and Leedspur - I came here to tell you the good news that I'm catching you up and I see that you are also banned.

Safe for all the religious labour voters to return to the board for a few weeks at least.

What I don 't understand about this sort to attitude mate is that IF you actually ENJOY fighting, why not find like-minded people off the web and down the pub? I'm sure there are many on the SSR post-match would love it! You can get it all out there...

 

[thfcsteff]

Oh no its not

You'll feel planet smilies wrath if you get lippy

:barnet::mrgreen:

 

[Golfball]

What I don 't understand about this sort to attitude mate is that IF you actually ENJOY fighting, why not find like-minded people off the web and down the pub? I'm sure there are many on the SSR post-match would love it! You can get it all out there...

Where did I say I enjoy fighting ? I never abuse people and I never threaten anyone online. I'll sometimes use slightly mocking tone and try to be strong with the points I make, but this is standard debating tactics used by most on the site. I dont see it as anything other than debate, some people feel the need to hate someone because of points discussed. I mean the prime minister feels its acceptable to call people idiots in parliament but on here you'd get banned for it.

And the message to Leedspur is based on a thread a week or so ago where he told me he was on 70 points and I wont be too far behind. He said he was trying to get me in trouble hence the post above.

And for the record - this "sort of attitude" you have picked up on is not one that feels the need to fight, its one that feels this points system is a bit OTT and taking things far too seriously. But I acknowledge its not my website so the owner can do what he wants, but if the intention is for the mods to be seen to be fair then the precedent Jordinho has set will eventually lead to lots of bans with lots of people who lose interest in coming here. However I have a feeling it was more aimed at me rather than being something that will be applied to everyone should that set of circumstances happen. Oh and if it is not Jordinho who decided on my ban, then just substitute his name for the mod(s) involved.

 

[milo]

And for the record - this "sort of attitude" you have picked up on is not one that feels the need to fight, its one that feels this points system is a bit OTT and taking things far too seriously. But I acknowledge its not my website so the owner can do what he wants, but if the intention is for the mods to be seen to be fair then the precedent Jordinho has set will eventually lead to lots of bans with lots of people who lose interest in coming here. However I have a feeling it was more aimed at me rather than being something that will be applied to everyone should that set of circumstances happen. Oh and if it is not Jordinho who decided on my ban, then just substitute his name for the mod(s) involved.

The mods have a policy of not discussing infractions or warnings issued to posters unless the poster brings it up themselves. I'll comment on why you were issued with infraction points in a minute but with regards to your suggestion that you were being singled out, you couldn't be more wrong.

 

[Golfball]

The mods have a policy of not discussing infractions or warnings issued to posters unless the poster brings it up themselves. I'll comment on why you were issued with infraction points in a minute but with regards to your suggestion that you were being singled out, you couldn't be more wrong.

Thank you for the clarification. Then my original point stands, a precedent has been set and if stuck too will probably annoy and trap even the friendliest of poster at some point.

And me being issued with points - I'm going on the reason and post that was PM'd to me by Jordinho. I called someone who acted aggressively a thick chav - I thought he was acting like one so said it. Didnt think it was that bad at all. Anything else I said in the thread was also said by others (so I assume there was nothing wrong with the rest of my posts).

 

[milo]

Funny I got a 1 day ban yesterday and thought of this thread. I called someone a chav who had called me a taco and said they would love to hit me. The word chav has a meaning - normally associated with anti social behaviour, the behaviour which the clown who threatened me from behind his pc was displaying.

First thing I thought of was this thread, and not surprised to see Jordinho named in your opening post -the same mod who banned me. Seems he lets his personal feelings towards posters get in the way of moderating the forum in a fair way. Quite clearly I did nothing wrong, ive said fair worse on here and never even had a mod bat an eyelid. If my response to the provocation I received counts as abuse, then I could report about 50 posts per day on here.

Jordinho - you may not miss me, but im quite sure there are some decent posters that will be put off this site if this sort of moderation is kept up.

You were not banned for just one post but for a series of posts in the OMT thread. You came into the thread like a bear with a sore head and took a high handed and condescending attitude to other posters from the off. You called Armchair Fan a "thick chav" which is personal abuse and against site rules.

We have recently published a new set of site rules, I think it would be worth drawing attention to two sections:

This includes replying to call another poster an obscene name, posting hostile rumours about a person, targeting a poster with numerous negative comments, posting pictures of a poster which cause offence to the person in question, posting in a manner deemed by a majority of the administrators to be unnecessarily aggressive, hostile or dismissive and anything else agreed upon by a majority of administrators as constituting a personal attack.

Glory-Glory is used by all sorts of people from all sorts of backgrounds and abusive, discriminatory, derogatory, racist, sexist or threatening language is not welcome. Basically, do not say something on the board that you would not be prepared to say to someone's face. This ruins the enjoyment of this board for many and creates a negative atmosphere.

The admin team have tried to make it clear recently that we are no longer prepared to sit by and watch a handful of posters shout down and belittle others. We will be issuing infraction points to any posters who post in an aggressive, abusive or derogatory manner. We want to encourage debate and open discussion but in order to do this we need to have an atmosphere where people feel comfortable expressing their views. It is possible that we will lose some posters as a result of this stance but we think that by making this board a more pleasant place to post, we will attract far more than we lose.

 

[thfcsteff]

Where did I say I enjoy fighting ? I never abuse people and I never threaten anyone online. I'll sometimes use slightly mocking tone and try to be strong with the points I make, but this is standard debating tactics used by most on the site. I dont see it as anything other than debate, some people feel the need to hate someone because of points discussed. I mean the prime minister feels its acceptable to call people idiots in parliament but on here you'd get banned for it.

And the message to Leedspur is based on a thread a week or so ago where he told me he was on 70 points and I wont be too far behind. He said he was trying to get me in trouble hence the post above.

And for the record - this "sort of attitude" you have picked up on is not one that feels the need to fight, its one that feels this points system is a bit OTT and taking things far too seriously. But I acknowledge its not my website so the owner can do what he wants, but if the intention is for the mods to be seen to be fair then the precedent Jordinho has set will eventually lead to lots of bans with lots of people who lose interest in coming here. However I have a feeling it was more aimed at me rather than being something that will be applied to everyone should that set of circumstances happen. Oh and if it is not Jordinho who decided on my ban, then just substitute his name for the mod(s) involved.

First off, I appreciate the measured tone of replies and apologize for coming across as snappy yesterday. I have been reading your posts for a little while, and have to say they have always come across as directly combative and antagonistic. Again, if you mean them in the spirit of debate, then apologies. I personally don't think some of the phrases used are 'debate' style. But again, we're all different (thank GHod). With regards to the prime minister...well, allow me to use an emoticon :-#!!!

Regarding Leeds...missed all of that, but perhaps don't worry about him?

I will comment on the modding. Who actually set the points is not relevant mate. I was equally piqued by the way in which you kept on and on putting your various points across, and the subsequent back/forth they encouraged which did not seem to be producing any 'debate-worthy' issues beyond a tinkling contest to see who's right/wins the point (my perception, perhaps not your intention).

We have been more vocal about what we are trying to do, notably uphold the rules as set and try very hard to get the forum to place where heated debate is encouraged without personal abuse pushing it over the top and into retrospective 'i told you sos' or 'you're a clown shoe' etc, etc...it's going to be tough, frankly, to maintain right now because the club are not blazing a trail and people are frustrated (all of us!)...

Again, appreciate your candid and clear response, apologies for any lack of clarity on my part and hope you remain with us in spirited debate without the personal dashes of frustration at other postees...I personally support and back Milo, Jordinho and all the mods in this.

Best,

Steff

 

[Golfball]

You were not banned for just one post but for a series of posts in the OMT thread. You came into the thread like a bear with a sore head and took a high handed and condescending attitude to other posters from the off. You called Armchair Fan a "thick chav" which is personal abuse and against site rules.

We have recently published a new set of site rules, I think it would be worth drawing attention to two sections:





The admin team have tried to make it clear recently that we are no longer prepared to sit by and watch a handful of posters shout down and belittle others. We will be issuing infraction points to any posters who post in an aggressive, abusive or derogatory manner. We want to encourage debate and open discussion but in order to do this we need to have an atmosphere where people feel comfortable expressing their views. It is possible that we will lose some posters as a result of this stance but we think that by making this board a more pleasant place to post, we will attract far more than we lose.

Why in the context I used the term thick chav was it considered abuse ? Did you see the post I replied to? it was thick chav sort of behaviour. I posted a reasonable post and got back a load of abuse from someone who I have never seen make a post on the site. Nothing wrong in associating the abuse I got back to that of how a chav would behave. It wasnt sustained abuse was it. I could report loads of people who make one off comments.

As for the other posts, nothing wrong with them at all. In fact several people were saying exactly the same thing using exactly the same words to describe it. I went into the thread initially not quoting anyone and giving an opinion on AVB and the game. I remember I used the term embarrassing to describe a few posts, BUT THEY WERE !! several other people did this and were not banned. Remember it is my opinion im giving, so if IMO I find something stupid or embarrassing then it is perfectly acceptable in online debate to say that so you can show other people the extent you disagree with. Sometimes you may slightly disagree, sometimes you may disagree to the point you find some comments a joke - its debate and these sort of comments/tone should be acceptable (as long as it can be backed up). Dont see why you should punish people because some are unable to realise its their comments/opinion that are being attacked and not their life/them. I get back patronising comments all the time, I dont take it personally it just shows me how they view it. bankrupt is a mod but is one of the worst for patronising comments, ill assume if I use his tactic of not quoting people when making the comment that I will also get away with it.

 

[Golfball]

First off, I appreciate the measured tone of replies and apologize for coming across as snappy yesterday. I have been reading your posts for a little while, and have to say they have always come across as directly combative and antagonistic. Again, if you mean them in the spirit of debate, then apologies. I personally don't think some of the phrases used are 'debate' style. But again, we're all different (thank GHod). With regards to the prime minister...well, allow me to use an emoticon :-#!!!

Regarding Leeds...missed all of that, but perhaps don't worry about him?

I will comment on the modding. Who actually set the points is not relevant mate. I was equally piqued by the way in which you kept on and on putting your various points across, and the subsequent back/forth they encouraged which did not seem to be producing any 'debate-worthy' issues beyond a tinkling contest to see who's right/wins the point (my perception, perhaps not your intention).

We have been more vocal about what we are trying to do, notably uphold the rules as set and try very hard to get the forum to place where heated debate is encouraged without personal abuse pushing it over the top and into retrospective 'i told you sos' or 'you're a clown shoe' etc, etc...it's going to be tough, frankly, to maintain right now because the club are not blazing a trail and people are frustrated (all of us!)...

Again, appreciate your candid and clear response, apologies for any lack of clarity on my part and hope you remain with us in spirited debate without the personal dashes of frustration at other postees...I personally support and back Milo, Jordinho and all the mods in this.

Best,

Steff

Maybe mods should go into threads and ask to explain/justify what they have said so there is no misunderstanding. My posts are still there so if you think they are provocative then banning me but keeping the posts there isnt going to help.

As for leeds, no I dont worry about him, but I wont take this place so seriously that I cant laugh at being issued points on an online forum ! just thought it was funny he told me I wont last long and within days I got banned. I fully expect to get to the 120 points mark at some point. Why did leeds get banned ? has he used basic computer knowledge to get back on the site under a new name yet ?