Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Slapdash

***Official PSF Moderation Thread***

Recommended Posts

I'll be honest - I don't think it needs moderation as much as it's called for.

I made a pretty cutting post about Republicans the other day (and have in the past) and have never been called a name or had a reaction of :lmao: from right wing guys. Even got a direct response from @Ramblin Wreck that was quite the opposite even though it probably was pretty cutting toward his politics.

Moral of the story (look at me) - by not being snarky or weasly all the time, calling people Trumpkins, or Social Justice Warriors or whatever is the condescending buzzword of the day, you probably haven't experienced a lot of the stuff we all seem to be outraged about (something I do try to never do to a fellow FBG).  We can do it fam.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, urbanhack said:
17 minutes ago, squistion said:

What happened to Beaver?

Why do you care????  Stop your high school drama board bull####.  Enough!

:goodposting:  Really wish there was a way to put him and the guys obsessed with him in a thread and leave them there.  Different sides of the same coin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, John Bender said:

I'll be honest - I don't think it needs moderation as much as it's called for.

I made a pretty cutting post about Republicans the other day (and have in the past) and have never been called a name or had a reaction of :lmao: from right wing guys. Even got a direct response from @Ramblin Wreck that was quite the opposite even though it probably was pretty cutting toward his politics.

Moral of the story (look at me) - by not being snarky or weasly all the time, calling people Trumpkins, or Social Justice Warriors or whatever is the condescending buzzword of the day, you probably haven't experienced a lot of the stuff we all seem to be outraged about (something I do try to never do to a fellow FBG).  We can do it fam.

 

Not all heroes wear capes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, John Bender said:

 

Moral of the story (look at me) - by not being snarky or weasly all the time, calling people Trumpkins, or Social Justice Warriors or whatever is the condescending buzzword of the day, you probably haven't experienced a lot of the stuff we all seem to be outraged about (something I do try to never do to a fellow FBG).  We can do it fam.

 

1

:thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, roadkill1292 said:

Is Social Justice Warrior really a condescending term? Would someone rather fight for injustice?

It shouldn't be.  But it feels that way.  I spend way too much time on Reddit and I'm probably just way too sensitive.

Edited by John Bender

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, roadkill1292 said:

Is Social Justice Warrior really a condescending term? Would someone rather fight for injustice?

You didn't know this? Its been used here as a disparaging term for years, and not even just from the usual suspects but from more "centerish" people as well.

Ive never understood it either. I consider myself a bit of a SJW...well, without the actual " warrioring" part. Not the least bit ashamed of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HellToupee said:

Sorry and do t worry I’m done here in the polical forums. I’ll stick to the FFA. There is no denying that Trump people are playing on a slanted field . What happened to Beaver yesterday and today was deplorable. There is one squeaky wheel , a bad hombre if you will , that makes me smh. I like this place but I’m done before I get the Jon mex or Beaver Cleaver treatment

Trump people are not playing on any slanted field.  There are very few of them actually trying to have an substantive discussion on this board.  You do try from time to time.

The one you mention you claim got such poor treatment was not one of them...there were multiple people pointing that out...sorry, seemed he got a lot of warnings and never changed (and I doubt he is really gone...).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, John Bender said:

I'll be honest - I don't think it needs moderation as much as it's called for.

I made a pretty cutting post about Republicans the other day (and have in the past) and have never been called a name or had a reaction of :lmao: from right wing guys. Even got a direct response from @Ramblin Wreck that was quite the opposite even though it probably was pretty cutting toward his politics.

Moral of the story (look at me) - by not being snarky or weasly all the time, calling people Trumpkins, or Social Justice Warriors or whatever is the condescending buzzword of the day, you probably haven't experienced a lot of the stuff we all seem to be outraged about (something I do try to never do to a fellow FBG).  We can do it fam.

 

:goodposting:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Trump people are not playing on any slanted field.  There are very few of them actually trying to have an substantive discussion on this board.  You do try from time to time.

The one you mention you claim got such poor treatment was not one of them...there were multiple people pointing that out...sorry, seemed he got a lot of warnings and never changed (and I doubt he is really gone...).

It's crap like this that's going to turn it from a forum into a collective.  Instead of hunting people down that have dissenting opinions you won't have to do anything but just sit there and continuously click the like button.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, tonydead said:

It's crap like this that's going to turn it from a forum into a collective.  Instead of hunting people down that have dissenting opinions you won't have to do anything but just sit there and continuously click the like button.

Be honest...what dissenting opinion did this person have or post?  A large majority of his posts were about other people and not about the topic or any dissenting opinion.

There is a reason multiple people were calling him out and rightfully so.  And they aren’t calling out you or stealthy or others who offer dissenting opinions.

I may not agree with you...but you offer an opinion and discuss things without getting like that (most of the time...as most of us won’t talk issues 100% of the time).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HellToupee said:

:shrug:

all I know amigo

So he got a TO yet the ones attacking Dodds the other day we’re back the next day? Awesome. :rolleyes:

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Ranethe said:

You didn't know this? Its been used here as a disparaging term for years, and not even just from the usual suspects but from more "centerish" people as well.

Ive never understood it either. I consider myself a bit of a SJW...well, without the actual " warrioring" part. Not the least bit ashamed of it.

Well, the people using it as disparagement are probably posters whose posts I don't see. Anybody I see using it probably uses it a little like we soccer dorks call ourselves soccer dorks; we're not really embarrassed by the term, if you get my drift.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Be honest...what dissenting opinion did this person have or post?  A large majority of his posts were about other people and not about the topic or any dissenting opinion.

There is a reason multiple people were calling him out and rightfully so.  And they aren’t calling out you or stealthy or others who offer dissenting opinions.

I may not agree with you...but you offer an opinion and discuss things without getting like that (most of the time...as most of us won’t talk issues 100% of the time).

 

I could find numerous examples that show otherwise.  As Tim pointed out there is a beehive mentality and the Trump thread is perfect example. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Be honest...what dissenting opinion did this person have or post?  A large majority of his posts were about other people and not about the topic or any dissenting opinion.

There is a reason multiple people were calling him out and rightfully so.  And they aren’t calling out you or stealthy or others who offer dissenting opinions.

I may not agree with you...but you offer an opinion and discuss things without getting like that (most of the time...as most of us won’t talk issues 100% of the time).

 

Because they are all part of the groupthink squad that attacks those that don’t go along with constant POTUS bashing.

If people really can’t handle the rolling smiley there’s an easy answer, remove it. Not sure how that is really an issue but if we are at the point where Beaver is constantly reported and can be banned for using a smiley let’s just get rid of it so no one can use it. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beav used :lmao: when Bucky said he wasn't familar with Oprah's political leanings and many posters went after him because they were offended by :lmao: . It's a damn emoji.

The people that attacked Dodds are still here and that will always continue.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, shoke said:

Beav used :lmao: when Bucky said he wasn't familar with Oprah's political leanings and many posters went after him because they were offended by :lmao: . It's a damn emoji.

The people that attacked Dodds are still here and that will always continue.

:coffee:

1 hour ago, HellToupee said:

Sorry and dont worry I’m done here in the polical forums. I’ll stick to the FFA. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, squistion said:

:coffee:

and why on earth you are protected the way you are here is beyond me. You stir the pot, report, and then complain when you are offended. Rinse and repeat.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Be honest...what dissenting opinion did this person have or post?  A large majority of his posts were about other people and not about the topic or any dissenting opinion.

There is a reason multiple people were calling him out and rightfully so.  And they aren’t calling out you or stealthy or others who offer dissenting opinions.

I may not agree with you...but you offer an opinion and discuss things without getting like that (most of the time...as most of us won’t talk issues 100% of the time).

 

Every day you whine about BC, me and a few others but do the same thing yourself that you whine about.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, squistion said:

:coffee:

@Joe Bryant

So copying a post and using this emoji isn't trolling but :lmao: is?   Confusing what is actually allowed or not because plenty of people use :lmao: for the exact same reason.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, shoke said:

and why on earth you are protected the way you are here is beyond me. You stir the pot, report, and then complain when you are offended. Rinse and repeat.

Excellent posting.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

@Joe Bryant

So copying a post and using this emoji isn't trolling but :lmao: is?   Confusing what is actually allowed or not because plenty of people use :lmao: for the exact same reason.

I'd like to see way less of all of those. 

Sadly, it may be the only answer is to just eliminate emojis. I thought we were better than that. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joe, so much of the problems here are caused by the same handful of posters.  Most of them just come back with different user names when they are banned/suspended.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Joe Bryant said:

I'd like to see way less of all of those. 

Sadly, it may be the only answer is to just eliminate emojis. I thought we were better than that. 

So bird avatars are forbidden & emojis eliminated. Splendid. I thought we were better too. 

While I have your attention.....It takes 2 to tango. Now I’m an adult, allegedly, and said I would totally ignore another party and asked the same but yet someone is still trying to stir the pot. This is insane. Suggestions? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, HellToupee said:

Suggestions? 

Always take the high road and don't fret over the little things like Internet slights.

Edited by Juxtatarot
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, HellToupee said:

So bird avatars are forbidden & emojis eliminated. Splendid. I thought we were better too. 

While I have your attention.....It takes 2 to tango. Now I’m an adult, allegedly, and said I would totally ignore another party and asked the same but yet someone is still trying to stir the pot. This is insane. Suggestions? 

It doesn't appear you are totally ignoring that poster.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

Every day you whine about BC, me and a few others but do the same thing yourself that you whine about.  

If I tell you that you're just as pretty as sho nuff and squisitron will you stop posting about them?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, thayman said:

If I tell you that you're just as pretty as sho nuff and squisitron will you stop posting about them?

No 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

No 

Its just odd.  I've never seen two people on a message board seemingly occupy so much of someone else's mind.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before we go off banning emojis and the like, can't we have some recognition that the concern many of us have in regard to certain posts is that they simply serve no positive aim? And, often, it feels as if some posts are done in a manner to actually just stir the pot in a negative fashion. If a post is done to at best add nothing, and in all likelihood create negative energy while adding not, maybe that is the issue and not the specific tactic employed (smilie, just a terse snide response, a quick personal attack)

Let's be clear... no emoji has "offended" anyone here. Not that I know, and certainly not me. It's just a response that, by design, adds nothing positive and in fact amps up the negative of the discourse. What purpose is that on a message board? And if you "got rid of" emoji's, those looking to add flippant, non-substantive (or worse yet, purposefully antagonistic and abrasive) posts will simply find another means to do so.

 

Can't we have some underlying principle of "does this post further the conversation" as some guide? Personally even if someone's post may be inflammatory, or even if it offends some, I am far more ok with being offended by someone posting earnestly, and trying to advance a point even if I disagree with the point, than I am with someone responding in a way to stop, impeded or derail the conversation.

So please, let's stop with "people can't handle the emojis" - that's an abjectly ridiculous point.  Some of us people do take issue with the fact that some responses, including just a smilie face and nothing else, are obviously not used to further discussion and in fact, perhaps the goal is the opposite, and that seems to run counter to what makes a good community/message board.

I'll hang up and listen.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, GoBirds said:

Because they are all part of the groupthink squad that attacks those that don’t go along with constant POTUS bashing.

If people really can’t handle the rolling smiley there’s an easy answer, remove it. Not sure how that is really an issue but if we are at the point where Beaver is constantly reported and can be banned for using a smiley let’s just get rid of it so no one can use it. 

I called out Beaver and squisition for taking a dump in threads arguing.  It’s annoying and serves no purpose.  It’s possible I use :lmao: more than anybody here but like that crazy dude in Mary Poppins, I love to laugh.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Joe Bryant said:

I'd like to see way less of all of those. 

Sadly, it may be the only answer is to just eliminate emojis. I thought we were better than that. 

The emoji use isn’t the problem - it’s that certain people have to bicker like children and for some reason enjoy it - if they didn’t they would have the people they argue with on ignore already.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, thayman said:

Its just odd.  I've never seen two people on a message board seemingly occupy so much of someone else's mind.  

Then you should focus a lot less of your time and mind on me. You’re right that is odd

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, GoBirds said:

If people really can’t handle the rolling smiley there’s an easy answer, remove it. Not sure how that is really an issue but if we are at the point where Beaver is constantly reported and can be banned for using a smiley let’s just get rid of it so no one can use it. 

Honestly, the smiley itself is meaningless, and certainly doesn't offend.  It's just a tactic used to avoid legitimate response or discussion. Moreso, as I mentioned above, if we get ride of the rolling smilie, some other tactic will be employed. It's the message board equivalent of "neener-neener" - and I wish I were joking.  But seriously, that's the purpose it serves, it's a poke in the eye, a flippant response, not intended for any positive benefit to the overall discourse. Isn't that in the end, what "trolling" is supposed to be? Purposefully adding nothing positive and in fact looking only to provoke? That is the only purpose of such responses when used over and over in the same manner. 

If someone doesn't have a legitimate response to someone's post that helps advance the conversation, don't respond.  Is that so much to ask? If someone does want to respond, just bring something constructive - whatever viewpoint - to the table.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll never figure out why people on both sides just dont use the ignore feature? What purpose does it serve to constantly :argue:?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:

I called out Beaver and squisition for taking a dump in threads arguing.  It’s annoying and serves no purpose.  It’s possible I use :lmao: more than anybody here but like that crazy dude in Mary Poppins, I love to laugh.

I agree, I think everyone should be able to use them and people get over it. Unfortunately the trend seems to be one side banned and as you can see above some still using to taunt with no consequences. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Koya said:

Before we go off banning emojis and the like, can't we have some recognition that the concern many of us have in regard to certain posts is that they simply serve no positive aim? And, often, it feels as if some posts are done in a manner to actually just stir the pot in a negative fashion. If a post is done to at best add nothing, and in all likelihood create negative energy while adding not, maybe that is the issue and not the specific tactic employed (smilie, just a terse snide response, a quick personal attack)

Let's be clear... no emoji has "offended" anyone here. Not that I know, and certainly not me. It's just a response that, by design, adds nothing positive and in fact amps up the negative of the discourse. What purpose is that on a message board? And if you "got rid of" emoji's, those looking to add flippant, non-substantive (or worse yet, purposefully antagonistic and abrasive) posts will simply find another means to do so.

 

Can't we have some underlying principle of "does this post further the conversation" as some guide? Personally even if someone's post may be inflammatory, or even if it offends some, I am far more ok with being offended by someone posting earnestly, and trying to advance a point even if I disagree with the point, than I am with someone responding in a way to stop, impeded or derail the conversation.

So please, let's stop with "people can't handle the emojis" - that's an abjectly ridiculous point.  Some of us people do take issue with the fact that some responses, including just a smilie face and nothing else, are obviously not used to further discussion and in fact, perhaps the goal is the opposite, and that seems to run counter to what makes a good community/message board.

I'll hang up and listen.

 

Your problem is you want to be judge and jury and others intent with the emoji.  You’ve certainly accused me incorrectly of trolling with it.  And you’re the guy that used to call anyone that wouldn’t argue with you a coward.   The real problem is everyone wants to police others behavior instead of worrying about their damn self. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎7‎/‎12‎/‎2017 at 8:52 PM, Slapdash said:

Complain about/discuss political sub forum moderation here, so we don't have to hear about it in other threads.

:goodposting:

 

It finally worked!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Koya said:

Can't we have some underlying principle of "does this post further the conversation" as some guide? Personally even if someone's post may be inflammatory, or even if it offends some, I am far more ok with being offended by someone posting earnestly, and trying to advance a point even if I disagree with the point, than I am with someone responding in a way to stop, impeded or derail the conversation

Very well thought out post but I just want to say this isn’t the Algonquin Round Table, it’s the earlier version, The Vicious Circle. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, HellToupee said:

Very well thought out post but I just want to say this isn’t the Algonquin Round Table, it’s the earlier version, The Vicious Circle. 

Vicious discourse - earnest, advancing the conversation discourse - I can deal with. Then again, I'm in real estate development, so that's called Town Hall on a Tuesday evening. 

 

PS - The Algonquin Room and the Hotel in NY are pretty freakin' spectacular.

Edited by Koya

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:

I called out Beaver and squisition for taking a dump in threads arguing.  It’s annoying and serves no purpose.  It’s possible I use :lmao: more than anybody here but like that crazy dude in Mary Poppins, I love to laugh.

I don't believe that I have argued with Beaver in any thread in probably about a year, which a check of my posting history should verify. It seemed like he responded to just about thing I posted ridiculing me in some manner or another, but I have not directly responded to him in ages. It may have seemed like arguing to you, but it was not back-and-forth, it was just a one sided attack on my posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, squistion said:

I don't believe that I have argued with Beaver in any thread in probably about a year, which a check of my posting history should verify. It seemed like he responded to just about thing I posted ridiculing me in some manner or another, but I have not directly responded to him in ages. It may have seemed like arguing to you, but it was not back-and-forth, it was just a one sided attack on my posts.

So you were innocent with your BieberClieber comments?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, squistion said:

I don't believe that I have argued with Beaver in any thread in probably about a year

You can’t possibly be serious with this reply.  I mean, I’m pretty stupid but only @Fat Drunk and Stupid Is that stupid.

Edited by AAABatteries
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, squistion said:

I don't believe that I have argued with Beaver in any thread in probably about a year, which a check of my posting history should verify. It seemed like he responded to just about thing I posted ridiculing me in some manner or another, but I have not directly responded to him in ages. It may have seemed like arguing to you, but it was not back-and-forth, it was just a one sided attack on my posts.

Yet you talk about him often.  So by admitting you don’t reply to him then you’re clearly trolling him.  

LOL at this nonsense too.  You nicknamed him Bieber cleaber.  You cry about other nicknames on this forum.  You accuse people of being aliases too.  Yet it’s only BC or HT you accuse never anyone else.  Spare us your victim bull crap. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, shoke said:

So you were innocent with your BieberClieber comments?

I think that it has been a long time since I last used that sobriquet. I believe I stopped using that after Joe issued his manifesto about the same time Wreck dropped his pigeon avatar as a show of good faith.

Edited by squistion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, squistion said:

I think that has been a long time since I last used that sobriquet.

It was a few days ago. Try again.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.