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

[The Football Freak]

@The Football Freak and @Fantasy Football Fairy In the same thread

I guess we just need a Fantasy Football Freak Fairy and the triumvirate would be complete.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

this guy. You report , stalk, troll & badger 

He even insulted posters that were trying to give him friendly advice when he was posting his personal twitter information.  He also ignored them and then someone outed his twitter account.  

 

[Henry Ford]

I think:

Posters: grow the hell up. If you say people supporting politician A are all :insert insult here:, then the supporters here of the politician know who you are talking about. Calling Trump supporters deplorable is what cost her the election, and what should get a time-out and post deletion. "I wasn't attacking you, just politician X supporters in general" is a cop-out.

Mods: You are as big a part of the problem as the problem posters. When you are moderating, check your emotions and your politics at the door. People are allowed to have opinions different from yours and you need to enforce equally. Most of you have been around this site for more than ten years and I know you're grown up men. Start acting like it, or ask Joe to get someone else to moderate. Ban people and delete posts, not entire threads.

Owners: you bear a big part of the responsibility too. Joe, you have given time-outs without understanding the context of the post, and when other posters point it out, you need to reconsider.  David, get your emotions under control. Seriously. Both of you: the only restrictions you have put on this board is that we be excellent to each other. Not to politicians, or sports figures, but to each other. Get rid of those posters who are not, on both sides of the spectrum. Publish a more detailed set of guidelines and enforce them fairly and without prejudice (political or otherwise - that isn't happening right now IMO)

Everybody: just grow up and be men - or women - or whatever gender you consider yourself (so as not to offend the LGBTQ crowd on the board).

I can only support this post if you make a clear decision on whether Q means Queer or Questioning and back it up with sound reasoning.

 

[bueno]

I can only support this post if you make a clear decision on whether Q means Queer or Questioning and back it up with sound reasoning.

Every time I figure what what the letters stand for, they change the alphabet.

 

[rockaction]

I actually had a mod change the name of an actual campus LGBT house because it included a slur within it. 

It was changed to Wesleyan University Alternative Housing. 

The name I won't reprint for fear of reprisal, but it's a doozy.  I don't even know what the letters stood for.  

 

[Joe Summer]

It's like the vowels. L, G, T and sometimes B or Q.

 

[Henry Ford]

I actually had a mod change the name of an actual campus LGBT house because it included a slur within it. 

It was changed to Wesleyan University Alternative Housing. 

The name I won't reprint for fear of reprisal, but it's a doozy.  I don't even know what the letters stood for.  

Oh, yeah, that place at Wesleyan is maybe the weirdest thing I've seen as far as a higher education name for something.

 

[Sand]

Everybody: just grow up and be men - or women - or whatever gender you consider yourself (so as not to offend the LGBTQ crowd on the board).

Seeing as you left out the IA+ part I'm sure the intersex and asexual people on this board are now in the process of getting you banned.  

 

[rockaction]

Oh, yeah, that place at Wesleyan is maybe the weirdest thing I've seen as far as a higher education name for something.

Yep.

My politics were largely shaped by living in the Wesleyan/Conn College/Yale/Mt. Holyoke/Smith/Elms corridor of 1-91. 

I lived, for most of my life, very close to Smith and Mt. Holyoke and Wesleyan. No more than a thirty minute drive to any of those places, though Smith and Mt. Holyoke were perhaps culturally closer.  

 

[timschochet]

Yep.

My politics were largely shaped by living in the Wesleyan/Conn College/Yale/Mt. Holyoke/Smith/Elms corridor of 1-91. 

I lived, for most of my life, very close to Smith and Mt. Holyoke and Wesleyan. No more than a thirty minute drive to any of those places, though Smith and Mt. Holyoke were perhaps culturally closer.  

My favorite non fiction author, William Manchester, taught at Wesleyan most of his life. 

 

[rockaction]

My favorite non fiction author, William Manchester, taught at Wesleyan most of his life. 

Yeah, I almost went there. Can you imagine?  

eta* Oh my. Mencken and the Baltimore Sun by way of Wesleyan. That must have been a mix. The Last Lion. Love it. Never had heard of him before this.  

 

[Bruce Dickinson]

Yep.

My politics were largely shaped by living in the Wesleyan/Conn College/Yale/Mt. Holyoke/Smith/Elms corridor of 1-91. 

I lived, for most of my life, very close to Smith and Mt. Holyoke and Wesleyan. No more than a thirty minute drive to any of those places, though Smith and Mt. Holyoke were perhaps culturally closer.  

IIRC, the Scooby-Doo main characters were inspired by colleges in that area.  Fred is Amherst, Velma is Smith, Daphne is Mt. Holyoke, Shaggy is Hampshire, and Scooby-Doo is UMass.

 

[rockaction]

IIRC, the Scooby-Doo main characters were inspired by colleges in that area.  Fred is Amherst, Velma is Smith, Daphne is Mt. Holyoke, Shaggy is Hampshire, and Scooby-Doo is UMass.

That makes total sense for the time period within which they drew it. 

Holy crow. That's funny.  

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

David Dodds, I would like some clarification please. Several people here seem to think you want no more political threads whatsoever and you will begin banning people who break that rule. I took you to mean that you want no "catch-all" threads, specifically about Trump, but you would allow threads about Trump regarding specific issues, which is why you didn't lock the Social Security thread. 

I won't post anymore in the new thread I started until I get a clear answer on this. Thank you. 

A new problem is thus created.

In the Shark Pool posters are requested to keep posts on one player or topic to a single living 'catch all' thread, which is great. This prevents the helter skelter topical approach where posters will delve into a topic for days or a week... and then the next week that's all forgotten and the whole argument is repeated again. 

So instead of a single thread dealing with x person or issue which can go on for months, the front page of the FFA could have 2-4 possibly duplicative threads concerning that person or issue in an effort to avoid the 'catch all' thread becoming problematic.

 

[jon_mx]

I am pretty sure my Trump is The Worst ever Thead is OK since it is only trying to capture bad things thus not a catchall.  

 

[The Commish]

Because people can't tell you think they're stupid unless you call them stupid?  I can count on one hand the people here who come to a conversation with no axe to grind rather come looking to read into whatever others say to fit a narrative they've already determined to be true.  That's not productive and it's not genuine.  It's also not something that can be controlled by others.  Only the individual using the approach can change their behavior.

My  

My mind has been changed in discussion groups a lot. It doesn't seem like it, but it has been. 

For example, my position on one of the deepest hot topics that will go unnamed has been changed by an internet forum and a simple question posed to me. 

This might be true in petty circumstances with petty people, but I don't consider myself petty. 

This board has also changed my mind in innumerate ways, ones that can't be fully expressed. I'd hate to lose that.

Ok...two hands

I'd hate to lose it too, but here we are.  I DO appreciate finding people contrary to the rule.

 

[ShamrockPride]

Hey look, luckily for everyone here...there's an incredibly simple solution available! Seperate politics forum. Amazing how simple things can be when you just take a step back and look at the big picture huh?

 

[McGarnicle]

My mind has been changed in discussion groups a lot. It doesn't seem like it, but it has been. 

For example, my position on one of the deepest hot topics that will go unnamed has been changed by an internet forum and a simple question posed to me. 

This might be true in petty circumstances with petty people, but I don't consider myself petty. 

This board has also changed my mind in innumerate ways, ones that can't be fully expressed. I'd hate to lose that. 

Same here. Thanks to Christo, I can now appreciate a full-figured lady.

 

[skol asylum]

I wasn't talking specifically about you, but maybe I should have been. Maximum efficiency here. Simultaneously whining, bringing politics into a non political post, implicitly arguing with my point and making this personal about yourself. Impressive.

I was trying to bring some humor too.

 

[MikeIke]

You should not get a timeout (or reported) for that. So yes, redic .

 

Yeah,  let's not do this. 

 

[McGarnicle]

This place is a joke.

 

[adonis]

Paying attention for most of the Russian Connection topic and I barely saw anything bad in there regarding comments about other posters.  Seems to have been killed more for the discussion of Trump and connections to Russia rather than personal insults there, which were lower than, and less severe than, in almost all other topics on this forum, political or not.

Seems that the M.O. here is to kill all threads critical of Trump, whether they're on a specific topic or not because the behavior in that topic was nowhere near problematic.  At this point it comes down to the pure censoring of views critical of Trump.  All other pretense has to be gone because that was a civil conversation.

 

[Hilts]

 

[HellToupee]

  At this point it comes down to the pure censoring of views critical of Trump. 

This is 

90% of any political thread for the past year is critical of Trump

 

[HellToupee]

Careful. Remember now this has been deemed highly offensive 

 

[adonis]

This is 

90% of any political thread for the past year is critical of Trump

And how many have been axed at this point?  Almost every one of them.  Russian connection was the latest one, but right before that was a pretty reasonable discussion of healthcare and the potential impacts of repeal.  I can't keep up with all the threads that have been axed on similar subjects.  

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

I stayed out of that thread (posting-wise) most of the day after Magaw told Max he wasn't allowed to post in that thread anymore.  I figured only one sides views were welcome in that thread.  I didn't see anyone else going after Clinton in that thread beyond that; just the normal Trump and Putin are cousins stuff.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Today's talk about the Baton Rouge murders has brought on some talk about how we moderate the boards.

I know some people think we moderate too much. Some not enough.

There does seem to be a general level of unexcellentness to each other that makes posting in some of the threads not fun. Not really outright attacks, just general toolishness. Some have suggested we moderate more heavily and give time outs for people being uncool. This is always a tough line to balance. People always see their posting on a different standard than the other person's posting. (Who usually seems to have have an opinion they disagree with)

So I'd throw it out here.

What would you guys like to see?

J

@Joe Bryant: Joe, long time poster first in TSP more recently FFA, long time subscriber - can we get some accountability in here?

- Who deleted it?

- Why? How about naming a pre-stated rule that was broken.

The Russian Connection thread was polite, excellent, productive, educational, substantive. 

Thank you.

 

[HellToupee]

I stayed out of that thread (posting-wise) most of the day after Magaw told Max he wasn't allowed to post in that thread anymore.  I figured only one sides views were welcome in that thread.  I didn't see anyone else going after Clinton in that thread beyond that; just the normal Trump and Putin are cousins stuff.

Thats what I saw as well, comrade

 

[Don Quixote]

Did the "Should I read Don Quixote?" thread get whacked accidentally? I was approaching a personal best record for likes on a post.

 

[HellToupee]

And how many have been axed at this point?  Almost every one of them.  Russian connection was the latest one, but right before that was a pretty reasonable discussion of healthcare and the potential impacts of repeal.  I can't keep up with all the threads that have been axed on similar subjects.  

Not sure how many were axed. I nuked my thread on my own

 

[Hilts]

Moral of the story is BGP was ahead of his time. 

 

[James Daulton]

This is 

90% of any political thread for the past year is critical of Trump

To be fair, 90% of Trump's political actions have been worthy of criticism. 

 

[HellToupee]

To be fair, 90% of Trump's political actions have been worthy of criticism. 

My response

 

[adonis]

To be fair, 90% of Trump's political actions have been worthy of criticism. 

My response

Careful guys, you're on your way to getting this thread axed.

 

[HellToupee]

A reasonable solution is to axe the hoop forum and let the political junkies have at it in there

 

[David Dodds]

I did not delete the Obamacare nor the Russian thread, but I can understand why a mod might have as the toolish levels of all things political has been pretty awful to watch manifest itself on the boards. 

 

[the rover]

I did not delete the Obamacare nor the Russian thread, but I can understand why a mod might have as the toolish levels of all things political has been pretty awful to watch manifest itself on the boards. 

Well done, mods.  Axe them all and permaban the usual offenders instead of letting them just repeat their nonsense in new threads.

Hopefully they find a new home to repeat their opinions to each other ad infintum.  

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I did not delete the Obamacare nor the Russian thread, but I can understand why a mod might have as the toolish levels of all things political has been pretty awful to watch manifest itself on the boards. 

The Russian thread was as polite and well policed as possibly imaginable. People were Excellent to each other. What a shame, David, at least ask the Mod to discuss particular posts so people could learn from them. Let's discuss.

It's really a shame.

 

[[scooter]]

I stayed out of that thread (posting-wise) most of the day after Magaw told Max he wasn't allowed to post in that thread anymore.  I figured only one sides views were welcome in that thread.  I didn't see anyone else going after Clinton in that thread beyond that; just the normal Trump and Putin are cousins stuff.

Magaw singled out Max because all of Max's anti-Hillary posts were unrelated to the thread topic (Russia). But there were plenty of other anti-Hillary/anti-Democrat/pro-Trump posts which were allowed to stand because they were relevant to the topic at hand.

Someone posted that the thread was much more civil than most political threads (and it was attributed to the absence of Tim, ha ha).



Anyway, the whole thing is weird. When Dodds was originally accused of using moderation to defend a pro-Trump bias, Dodds denied it and basically said that he was only banning "catch all" threads. We were told that political threads would be permitted as long as they stuck to specific topics. Well, the Russia thread DID stick to a specific topic. And it was fairly civil, with both sides making their points without being abusive.

And yet the thread was nuked. So what now? I don't know what to believe anymore.

 

[bostonfred]

I did not delete the Obamacare nor the Russian thread, but I can understand why a mod might have as the toolish levels of all things political has been pretty awful to watch manifest itself on the boards. 

90% of the posts in this thread are awful posts from the same guys. Just hand me the axe. I'll chop.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

@FBG Moderator

Is this thing on?

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

Magaw singled out Max because all of Max's anti-Hillary posts were unrelated to the thread topic (Russia). But there were plenty of other anti-Hillary/anti-Democrat/pro-Trump posts which were allowed to stand because they were relevant to the topic at hand.

Someone posted that the thread was much more civil than most political threads (and it was attributed to the absence of Tim, ha ha).



Anyway, the whole thing is weird. When Dodds was originally accused of using moderation to defend a pro-Trump bias, Dodds denied it and basically said that he was only banning "catch all" threads. We were told that political threads would be permitted as long as they stuck to specific topics. Well, the Russia thread DID stick to a specific topic. And it was fairly civil, with both sides making their points without being abusive.

And yet the thread was nuked. So what now? I don't know what to believe anymore.

I don't think it's civil.  There's a handful of posters that can take shots at people all day long.  I feel like if I respond I'm getting banned.  Magaw banned me a couple weeks ago for 3 days for laughing at a post, when that happens here 10 times an hour at least.

I don't know the rules either but try to follow whatever Dodds says we're allowed to do.  Most of the political threads are the same 25 people posting the same thing 500 times each over and over and over mixed in with the attacks and stuff. 

 

[David Dodds]

The Russian thread was as polite and well policed as possibly imaginable. People were Excellent to each other. What a shame, David, at least ask the Mod to discuss particular posts so people could learn from them. Let's discuss.

It's really a shame.




 

I am not sure who even deleted it.  

 

[[scooter]]

I don't think it's civil.  There's a handful of posters that can take shots at people all day long.  I feel like if I respond I'm getting banned.  Magaw banned me a couple weeks ago for 3 days for laughing at a post,

Do you think it's civil to post nothing but the lmao emoticon again and again and again?

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

The Russia thread got axed?

 

[hilineninerfan]

I am not sure who even deleted it.  

Russian hackers?

 

[msommer]

Do you think it's civil to post nothing but the lmao emoticon again and again and again?

Quite a few people do

 

[bostonfred]

I am not sure who even deleted it.  

Maybe they mpved it to the politics forum. That seems appropriate 

 

[MaxThreshold]

Magaw singled out Max because all of Max's anti-Hillary posts were unrelated to the thread topic (Russia). But there were plenty of other anti-Hillary/anti-Democrat/pro-Trump posts which were allowed to stand because they were relevant to the topic at hand.

Someone posted that the thread was much more civil than most political threads (and it was attributed to the absence of Tim, ha ha).



Anyway, the whole thing is weird. When Dodds was originally accused of using moderation to defend a pro-Trump bias, Dodds denied it and basically said that he was only banning "catch all" threads. We were told that political threads would be permitted as long as they stuck to specific topics. Well, the Russia thread DID stick to a specific topic. And it was fairly civil, with both sides making their points without being abusive.

And yet the thread was nuked. So what now? I don't know what to believe anymore.

That's

I brought up Hillary in the context of "No way the Russian hack caused the huge turnaround for Trump causing Hillary to lose" which was certainly relevant to the discussion.