What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

FFA Moderation Thoughts - What Do You Think? (1 Viewer)

How would you like to see the FFA moderated?

  • More heavily moderated than it is now with time outs given much more frequently for unexcellent beha

    Votes: 42 11.4%

  • A little more moderated than it is now with time outs given a little more frequently for unexcellent

    Votes: 73 19.8%

  • Keep it like it is now

    Votes: 119 32.3%

  • A little less moderated than it is now with time outs given a little less frequently for unexcellent

    Votes: 63 17.1%

  • A lot less moderated than it is now with time outs given much less frequently for unexcellent behavi

    Votes: 71 19.3%
  • Total voters
    368
Harry Manback said:
I'm not sure why you don't understand what a suggestion is.

You seem too eager to get father's approval, and impress Big Joe. Sad. 
Click to expand...
I couldn't care less about getting "Big Joe's" approval.  I'm a business owner and I see things from that point of view.   There are plenty of forums where people can say whatever they want without the possibility of compromising the image of a good business that is run by good people.  This, however is not one of those forums.   If it's sad that I'm mindful of that--so be it.   If Joe decides that he doesn't care about potential user experiences on here--it's his decision because it's his business.   

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't see it as a free speech thing so much. To me, it's more that the rules and filter regarding language don't fit the demographics of this board. This is a board for adult men. There are "who's hottest" threads. There are yoga pants threads.  Yet at the same time there is a language filter filtering out the most asinine words and on top of that you STILL get timeouts for having too many hashtags show up in your posts. It's crazy.

This place isn't Sunday church. It's not kindergarten class. Focus the resources of the mods on weeding out people who aren't being excellent to each other instead of trying to make this place G rated. 

 
jvdesigns2002 said:
I couldn't care less about getting "Big Joe's" approval.  I'm a business owner and I see things from that point of view.   There are plenty of forums where people can say whatever they want without the possibility of compromising the image of a good business that is run by good people.  This, however is not one of those forums.   If it's sad that I'm mindful of that--so be it.   If Joe decides that he doesn't care about potential user experiences on here--it's his decision because it's his business.   
Click to expand...
He's asking for opinions. I gave mine. What is confusing you?

 
Harry Manback said:
He's asking for opinions. I gave mine. What is confusing you?
Click to expand...
Read my earlier posts--I clearly stated what I voted for too?  What's your deal man?   In your post--you brought up "free speech"-which is not a "guaranteed right" in the world of private enterprise.  If your opinion is that you want no moderation--just say you want no moderation--all I pointed out was that your premise of "free speech" doesn't apply in this realm?  Nobody is trying to silence your opinion.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
jvdesigns2002 said:
Read my earlier posts--I clearly stated what I voted for too?  What's your deal man?   In your post--you brought up "free speech"-which is not a "guaranteed right" in the world of private enterprise.  If your opinion is that you want no moderation--just say you want no moderation--all I pointed out was that your premise of "free speech" doesn't apply in this realm?  Nobody is trying to silence your opinion.  
Click to expand...
I'm not saying he HAS to do it. I'm saying my suggestion would be to embrace that ideology more on HIS website. I'm not telling him he has to, I'm suggesting, like he asked me to do.

What is your deal? What are you trying to prove here?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Harry Manback said:
I'm not saying he HAS to do it. I'm saying my suggestion would be to embrace that ideology more on HIS website. I'm not telling him he has to, I'm suggesting, like he asked me to do.

What is your deal? What are you trying to prove here?
Click to expand...
Okay--you suggest no moderation--and I suggest slightly more moderation.  Crystal clear.  You suggest why you feel your way--and I've suggested why I feel my way.  That's also crystal clear.   Seems like you want to argue for the sake of arguing.   I'm not interested in that--nor am I out to "prove" anything.   We've both stated our opinions clearly.  There is zero reason for this back and forth to continue and I'm frankly baffled it's gone this far.  

 
jvdesigns2002 said:
Okay--you suggest no moderation--and I suggest slightly more moderation.  Crystal clear.  You suggest why you feel your way--and I've suggested why I feel my way.  That's also crystal clear.   Seems like you want to argue for the sake of arguing.   I'm not interested in that--nor am I out to "prove" anything.   We've both stated our opinions clearly.  There is zero reason for this back and forth to continue and I'm frankly baffled it's gone this far.  
Click to expand...
:lmao:

You, for some reason, felt the need to respond to my comment to Joe. If it was unclear, I was never actually talking to you.

I said, to Joe, " My suggestion would be to embrace free speech, let users who have problems with a users posts block that user themselves, rather than encourage a schoolyard tattling system." 

You had to assert yourself and try to "inform" me that this isn't an entitlement. I never suggested it was. Why is this going back and forth? Because you felt the need to insert yourself into my conversation with someone else, and can't see how annoying that is. You feel compelled to continue to justify your opinion, which I never questioned, unlike what you've done to mine. In fact, you seem to think I care what your suggestion is, this wasn't intended to be a conversation with you. Not everything is about you.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Harry Manback said:
:lmao:

You, for some reason, felt the need to respond to my comment to Joe. If it was unclear, I was never actually talking to you.

I said, to Joe, " My suggestion would be to embrace free speech, let users who have problems with a users posts block that user themselves, rather than encourage a schoolyard tattling system." 

You had to assert yourself and try to "inform" me that this isn't an entitlement. I never suggested it was. Why is this going back and forth? Because you felt the need to insert yourself into my conversation with someone else, and can't see how annoying that is. You feel compelled to continue to justify your opinion, which I never questioned, unlike what you've done to mine. In fact, you seem to think I care what your suggestion is, this wasn't intended to be a conversation with you. Not everything is about you.
Click to expand...
I felt the need to respond to your comment because it was made in a public forum where the ENTIRE POINT is to present different points of views and discuss them in a civil fashion. Nothing I said about your point of view was rude, or insulting. I never made any personal attacks--unlike you basically calling me a "brown noser".   I have never seen any rules on this board where there were restrictions on who could comment on each point of view.   I'm sorry if me being intrigued enough to comment about your public point of view in a public forum was wrong.     In a perfect world--I actually agree with your take--I'd love a forum that is completely unmoderated.  I am also mindful that as a business owner--the reputation of a business--along with the customer experiences of a business are vitally important.   I think it's crystal clear that many of the posters in here make comments, posts not caring or being mindful that there is a business behind these forums--and I personally thought it was important to bring that point up.   I also know that there are very few businesses that could survive with a business model of "turn your heads to a customer insulting another customer--as they will figure it out among themselves".    Me disagreeing with your point of view--is not me silencing it--or making it about "me".  It's creating a discussion--which is what this entire thread was intended to do.   If I came across as being rude--that was not my intention--nor was it any desire to make it "about me".   Is that clear enough?

 
HellToupee said:
The same 3 or 4 people have spammed your TRUMP  thread for months rendering it unreadable.It's a shame ,it really is.
Click to expand...
And twice that number have spammed the Hillary thread on a daily basis, but none of the people who complain about the Trump thread have ever had an issue with that (in fact they give likes to those posts).  If you want to complain about spamming fine, but it would be nice if you raised the same objection when it just didn't involve your pet thread.

 
timschochet WAS suspended as of last night- either for the original comments about Eminence or for defending them rather glibly in this thread yesterday- not quite sure which. 

In any case, those comments by tim about Eminence have been taken out of context in this current discussion. The context was that in almost every one of those cases, Eminence would start a ridiculous or offensive thread about himself, and the result was each time that at least 9 or 10 people would respond by insulting Eminence. Tim was often one of these 9-10 people. These insults, like the threads themselves, were not perceived by anyone here as serious discussion, or if they were, they were so deliberately trollish and offensive so as to leave no doubt about their intent. (To cite one very representative example, Eminence, who had already posted several times on the superior qualities of the white race, started a thread in which he wanted to consider which of several universities he might attend, and listed the percentage of white students as the key factor in making his decision.) I think the mods here understood that in these cases the entire discussion was shtick, which is why these insults were never punished. 

I believe that in serious discussions about politics and culture, a more mature, civil tone is warranted, and that rude behavior should be sanctioned by the moderators. 

 
Winston Churchill said:
timschochet WAS suspended as of last night- either for the original comments about Eminence or for defending them rather glibly in this thread yesterday- not quite sure which. 

In any case, those comments by tim about Eminence have been taken out of context in this current discussion. The context was that in almost every one of those cases, Eminence would start a ridiculous or offensive thread about himself, and the result was each time that at least 9 or 10 people would respond by insulting Eminence. Tim was often one of these 9-10 people. These insults, like the threads themselves, were not perceived by anyone here as serious discussion, or if they were, they were so deliberately trollish and offensive so as to leave no doubt about their intent. (To cite one very representative example, Eminence, who had already posted several times on the superior qualities of the white race, started a thread in which he wanted to consider which of several universities he might attend, and listed the percentage of white students as the key factor in making his decision.) I think the mods here understood that in these cases the entire discussion was shtick, which is why these insults were never punished. 

I believe that in serious discussions about politics and culture, a more mature, civil tone is warranted, and that rude behavior should be sanctioned by the moderators. 
Click to expand...
:lmao:

 
Winston Churchill said:
timschochet WAS suspended as of last night- either for the original comments about Eminence or for defending them rather glibly in this thread yesterday- not quite sure which. 

In any case, those comments by tim about Eminence have been taken out of context in this current discussion. The context was that in almost every one of those cases, Eminence would start a ridiculous or offensive thread about himself, and the result was each time that at least 9 or 10 people would respond by insulting Eminence. Tim was often one of these 9-10 people. These insults, like the threads themselves, were not perceived by anyone here as serious discussion, or if they were, they were so deliberately trollish and offensive so as to leave no doubt about their intent. (To cite one very representative example, Eminence, who had already posted several times on the superior qualities of the white race, started a thread in which he wanted to consider which of several universities he might attend, and listed the percentage of white students as the key factor in making his decision.) I think the mods here understood that in these cases the entire discussion was shtick, which is why these insults were never punished. 

I believe that in serious discussions about politics and culture, a more mature, civil tone is warranted, and that rude behavior should be sanctioned by the moderators. 
Click to expand...


don't use 3rd person here tim...

 
lod001 said:
A real Free For All would solve this problem. This one is Free For All - G version. Not even PG.
Click to expand...
How dare you suggest the right thing to do?

This actually would work if the other forums were tightly moderated. Keep the flame wars in one spot, like when Bunny designated the Free Zones for selling drugs in The Wire. 

 
squistion said:
And twice that number have spammed the Hillary thread on a daily basis, but none of the people who complain about the Trump thread have ever had an issue with that (in fact they give likes to those posts).  If you want to complain about spamming fine, but it would be nice if you raised the same objection when it just didn't involve your pet thread.
Click to expand...
I am a very political person.  I have thus far avoided both the Trump and the Clinton threads.  I am kind of proud of my restraint. 

 
Winston Churchill said:
timschochet WAS suspended as of last night- either for the original comments about Eminence or for defending them rather glibly in this thread yesterday- not quite sure which. 

In any case, those comments by tim about Eminence have been taken out of context in this current discussion. The context was that in almost every one of those cases, Eminence would start a ridiculous or offensive thread about himself, and the result was each time that at least 9 or 10 people would respond by insulting Eminence. Tim was often one of these 9-10 people. These insults, like the threads themselves, were not perceived by anyone here as serious discussion, or if they were, they were so deliberately trollish and offensive so as to leave no doubt about their intent. (To cite one very representative example, Eminence, who had already posted several times on the superior qualities of the white race, started a thread in which he wanted to consider which of several universities he might attend, and listed the percentage of white students as the key factor in making his decision.) I think the mods here understood that in these cases the entire discussion was shtick, which is why these insults were never punished. 

I believe that in serious discussions about politics and culture, a more mature, civil tone is warranted, and that rude behavior should be sanctioned by the moderators. 
Click to expand...
:penalty:

This is really poor form tim. We know Churchill is you , don't tell everyone . Don't ask , don't tell is the common practice of proper alias use while under the thumb.

Kind of against the spirit of the banning. 

 
I think there should be a jail cell graphic on the opening page and when we are suspended our avatar and name be posted therein along with the charge and the sentence.  Before being readmitted to the community I believe we should be forced to post an apology relevant to our charge.  I believe also that the offended person should have the right to parole the incarcerated offender earlier at their sole discretion.

 
Winston Churchill said:
timschochet WAS suspended as of last night- either for the original comments about Eminence or for defending them rather glibly in this thread yesterday- not quite sure which. 

In any case, those comments by tim about Eminence have been taken out of context in this current discussion. The context was that in almost every one of those cases, Eminence would start a ridiculous or offensive thread about himself, and the result was each time that at least 9 or 10 people would respond by insulting Eminence. Tim was often one of these 9-10 people. These insults, like the threads themselves, were not perceived by anyone here as serious discussion, or if they were, they were so deliberately trollish and offensive so as to leave no doubt about their intent. (To cite one very representative example, Eminence, who had already posted several times on the superior qualities of the white race, started a thread in which he wanted to consider which of several universities he might attend, and listed the percentage of white students as the key factor in making his decision.) I think the mods here understood that in these cases the entire discussion was shtick, which is why these insults were never punished. 

I believe that in serious discussions about politics and culture, a more mature, civil tone is warranted, and that rude behavior should be sanctioned by the moderators. 
Click to expand...
Related

 
squistion said:
You and I for sure. :hifive:
Click to expand...
Sorry, I meant anyone with some authority or investment or input into mod policy.

One recommendation I would make is a pinned thread where mods chime in and help discuss mod policy. But if no mod is reading this thread it seems like all this good thought (in this thread) goes to waste.

 
HellToupee said:
:penalty:

This is really poor form tim. We know Churchill is you , don't tell everyone . Don't ask , don't tell is the common practice of proper alias use while under the thumb.

Kind of against the spirit of the banning. 
Click to expand...
And we all remember you complaining about Eminence using Fox Scream when he was suspended for a month and was blatant about using that alias...oh wait...

 
With tim gone...will some heads now explode like Smith in the last matrix when he lost his whole reason to exist?

 
HellToupee said:
:penalty:

This is really poor form tim. We know Churchill is you , don't tell everyone . Don't ask , don't tell is the common practice of proper alias use while under the thumb.

Kind of against the spirit of the banning. 
Click to expand...


Sometimes an alias is a necessary evil. 

-B

 
in which eminence weighs the pros and cons of each university he wants to attend, curiously including the % of white students attending each university.

there were many other instances of casual racism and homophobia that i'm not going to search for because who cares.  tim was just telling it like it is.

added bonus: here is em about half of the way down the page telling someone he is stupid and that he is going to get hit.  

 
Peyton Marino said:
in which eminence weighs the pros and cons of each university he wants to attend, curiously including the % of white students attending each university.

there were many other instances of casual racism and homophobia that i'm not going to search for because who cares.  tim was just telling it like it is.

added bonus: here is em about half of the way down the page telling someone he is stupid and that he is going to get hit.  
Click to expand...
:goodposting:

Honestly, this forum would be a better place if Joe perma-banned everyone that hasn't insulted Eminence.

 
squistion said:
And we all remember you complaining about Eminence using Fox Scream when he was suspended for a month and was blatant about using that alias...oh wait...
Click to expand...
:shrug:

sorry scoop , I don't keep a notebook on every fbg & and alias they might have. But was Eminence flaunting that FS  it was himself? If he was than shame on him

 
HellToupee said:
:shrug:

sorry scoop , I don't keep a notebook on every fbg & and alias they might have. But was Eminence flaunting that FS  it was himself? If he was than shame on him
Click to expand...
Was he flaunting it? Hell yes.

The instant he was suspended he posted both in his Trump thread and the gambling thread under the Fox Scream alias that he was given a time out "for being naughty".  He then continued to post as he normally did in those threads (and a few others) until he could post under the Eminence moniker again.

 
squistion said:
Was he flaunting it? Hell yes.

The instant he was suspended he posted both in his Trump thread and the gambling thread under the Fox Scream alias that he was given a time out "for being naughty".  He then continued to post as he normally did in those threads (and a few others) until he could post under the Eminence moniker again.
Click to expand...
:thumbup:  for using moniker . 

If this is true I agree with you

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Joe Bryant
  • Poll Poll
Clickbaity vs Boring Subject Lines - What do you think?
Replies
32
Views
437
Phil Elliott
Phil Elliott
GordonGekko
What Do You Believe Happens To You After You Die? (29/30)
Replies
38
Views
2K
Leroy Hoard
Leroy Hoard
GordonGekko
What Are Harsh Truths About Real Life That You Would Prefer To Just Ignore ? (8/30)
Replies
5
Views
879
bigbottom
bigbottom

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top