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!

no smiles for you! (2 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
This is a weird forum. It used to be much better, and much more of a community. But, it has definitely lost that over the years.

I frequent another board that is, in many ways, very similar to this board. At its core, it is a fan forum for a sports team, but it also has forums for other sports, other teams, a Chat Forum that is akin to the FFA, and Debate/Discussion Forum that is akin to the Political Forum, and a few others.

The population in that community "looks" very similar to this - it's mostly white, middle-aged men pontificating on the daily happenings around the world. One key difference is the board is based in London, and I would guess the board splits 70/30 British/European to non-Europeans.

There is only 1 topic that is forbidden - Israeli - Palestinian conflict. (Even then there is typically a limited discussion if there is a particularly newsworthy development)

The Chat - has many of the same threads you see in FFA, its lighthearted, there is a "This thread is useless without pictures" - 7000 page thread with mostly humorous photos - all work safe, no yoga pants, or worse - which is a pretty nice trade-off. Same with "Videos" and "animated GiFS". Its a community, and people respect the community standards.

The board itself is a bit more active than this - and you get a wider variety of opinions, but you also get the same type of split opinions in the US Politics thread, or the British Politics, or the Brexit, etc. More liberal than conservative - and same type of "cliques" you saw here - but the conversations carry on, with the same responses you saw here, minus the whining.

In terms of reaction emojis: Like, Agree, Funny, Winner, Informative, Thanks, Heart, Disagree, WTF?, Dislike, and Spam/Off-Topic.

These reactions help keep a lot of things under-control. It keeps a lot of people from posting the same thing 5 other people already posted. They allow you to "disagree" without being disagreeable. Only two reactions are considered "Negative" - Dislike and Spam - and if a post gets too many, that triggers an alert to the mods - which helps them focus on any particularly egregious posts (by community standards), and they then largely ignore any of the petty stuff, and everyone moves on.

Your "reputation" is shown with your UserName (which is just a tally of the Positive, Neutral, and Negative ratings your posts have received.)

You learn quickly not to "complain" about individual ratings - as that is seen as a legitimate reason to pile on more negative ratings. And, nobody really likes to get negative ratings - even if you ignore them. Its also a function of fat fingers with people scrolling on the phone - it happens.

And sometimes - people laugh at you, not with you. That is really just a function of life. But, I have never seen a complaint for the mocking reaction - you just know it's no different than getting a "disagree" rating - which is also no big deal there. Many posts will get agree and disagree ratings - because, well, there are a lot of people who agree or disagree with you. All part of the community.


Long-winded way of suggesting - you are going in the wrong direction by taking away ratings, and should, in fact, include more ways for people to express themselves - in a somewhat benign manner. Let someone hit "disagree" on a post, and they feel less need to "Mock" or be disagreeable. As moderators, don't get lost in the weeds - save your time for the real issues - and a community will self-police more than you give them credit for.
 
This is a weird forum. It used to be much better, and much more of a community. But, it has definitely lost that over the years.

I frequent another board that is, in many ways, very similar to this board. At its core, it is a fan forum for a sports team, but it also has forums for other sports, other teams, a Chat Forum that is akin to the FFA, and Debate/Discussion Forum that is akin to the Political Forum, and a few others.

The population in that community "looks" very similar to this - it's mostly white, middle-aged men pontificating on the daily happenings around the world. One key difference is the board is based in London, and I would guess the board splits 70/30 British/European to non-Europeans.

There is only 1 topic that is forbidden - Israeli - Palestinian conflict. (Even then there is typically a limited discussion if there is a particularly newsworthy development)

The Chat - has many of the same threads you see in FFA, its lighthearted, there is a "This thread is useless without pictures" - 7000 page thread with mostly humorous photos - all work safe, no yoga pants, or worse - which is a pretty nice trade-off. Same with "Videos" and "animated GiFS". Its a community, and people respect the community standards.

The board itself is a bit more active than this - and you get a wider variety of opinions, but you also get the same type of split opinions in the US Politics thread, or the British Politics, or the Brexit, etc. More liberal than conservative - and same type of "cliques" you saw here - but the conversations carry on, with the same responses you saw here, minus the whining.

In terms of reaction emojis: Like, Agree, Funny, Winner, Informative, Thanks, Heart, Disagree, WTF?, Dislike, and Spam/Off-Topic.

These reactions help keep a lot of things under-control. It keeps a lot of people from posting the same thing 5 other people already posted. They allow you to "disagree" without being disagreeable. Only two reactions are considered "Negative" - Dislike and Spam - and if a post gets too many, that triggers an alert to the mods - which helps them focus on any particularly egregious posts (by community standards), and they then largely ignore any of the petty stuff, and everyone moves on.

Your "reputation" is shown with your UserName (which is just a tally of the Positive, Neutral, and Negative ratings your posts have received.)

You learn quickly not to "complain" about individual ratings - as that is seen as a legitimate reason to pile on more negative ratings. And, nobody really likes to get negative ratings - even if you ignore them. Its also a function of fat fingers with people scrolling on the phone - it happens.

And sometimes - people laugh at you, not with you. That is really just a function of life. But, I have never seen a complaint for the mocking reaction - you just know it's no different than getting a "disagree" rating - which is also no big deal there. Many posts will get agree and disagree ratings - because, well, there are a lot of people who agree or disagree with you. All part of the community.


Long-winded way of suggesting - you are going in the wrong direction by taking away ratings, and should, in fact, include more ways for people to express themselves - in a somewhat benign manner. Let someone hit "disagree" on a post, and they feel less need to "Mock" or be disagreeable. As moderators, don't get lost in the weeds - save your time for the real issues - and a community will self-police more than you give them credit for.

Thanks for the thoughtful response. There are as many different ways to have a forum as there are forums.

I don't know this one is "weird" but it does feel unique so maybe that is weird. I also don't know I agree it was better in the past. I feel like it's a great community now. There are way more options now for people to have community but I believe this one is unique and special and great.

We definitely are better without the politics I belive. But I'm sure there are some forums like the one you mention who do that well.

I do think the ratings on posters is interesting. It's not something we have the ability to do now but maybe it's something we can consider for the future.

Thanks.
 
When my daughter was a kid, I created a club penguin account and I would harass her by going into her igloo to just stand or I would follow her around wherever she went. It got to the point, that she was complaining about me to her online and real life friends that also played club Penguin. She’s 24 now and has thick skin!
When she outgrew Club Penguin did you whine and complain to your friends that you couldn't harass her anymore?

Link to people advocating for the smilie so they can harass other posters?


100% serious question, are you one of the people who is offended by the laughing emoji?
No, I wasn't. And the powers that be would back that up. Far as I can remember, I only ever reported one guy from the Political Forum, who has since scampered off elsewhere to be a troll.

No, I don't have a link to people advocating for emojis so they can harass people. Which I don't need to provide, because I never said that. NOw: Can I get that link that I asked for? I have answered your questions, now answer mine:

What's the proof that this was all created by a small group of posters who complained and reported?

I fully expect you, and everyone else, to ignore this question.

When my daughter was a kid, I created a club penguin account and I would harass her by going into her igloo to just stand or I would follow her around wherever she went. It got to the point, that she was complaining about me to her online and real life friends that also played club Penguin. She’s 24 now and has thick skin!
When she outgrew Club Penguin did you whine and complain to your friends that you couldn't harass her anymore?

Link to people advocating for the smilie so they can harass other posters?


100% serious question, are you one of the people who is offended by the laughing emoji?
No, I wasn't. And the powers that be would back that up. Far as I can remember, I only ever reported one guy from the Political Forum, who has since scampered off elsewhere to be a troll.

No, I don't have a link to people advocating for emojis so they can harass people. Which I don't need to provide, because I never said that. NOw: Can I get that link that I asked for? I have answered your questions, now answer mine:

What's the proof that this was all created by a small group of posters who complained and reported?

I fully expect you, and everyone else, to ignore this question.


My recollection was some people did report it back in the PSF days and it was discussed back then - however, 1. I could be wrong as my memory sucks and 2. I don’t even care.
You are right, and I remember, and I also know that's why people are assuming that is the reason for this current decision, but since Squis and GoBirds aren't really around much anymore, I don't see how it applies to this scenario. I think you would agree that's not proof.

I actually believe Joe when Joe gave his reason. I choose to not believe what everyone thinks is the reason, (with zero evidence,) while indirectly calling Joe a liar, as they decide his answer wasn't the truth.

Can anyone even point to one example of when this was happening lately, where someone was weaponizing the laugh emoji? I can't. Whereas the last time it was banned, everyone knew why, and there were plenty of examples. If no one has any examples, why would I even assume someone knows what they are talking about when they offer an alternative theory to Joe's explanation?

People were complaining, and need to toughen up? Yeah maybe, and maybe people who got an emoji taken away need to toughen up.

I don’t have any evidence to back up your conspiracy theory and hyper focus on people not believing what Joe said. It’s not that I’m ignoring your question, it’s that your focus has nothing to do with why it was taken away.

So this thread is to request that Joe bring back laughter and smiles. That’s it.
 
joe please bring back the reaction emojis and just discipline the people that misuse them i think that is overwhelmingly what the members want

Thanks. We tried that and I chose not to do mass suspensions for people.

We'll stick to the 5 instant reaction emojis.

And of course, still have all the emojis available within the comment replies.
 
Lets be honest - if you have to resort to "mass suspensions" then the community is broken - and taking away a reaction emoji is not doing anything to fix the community.

Indeed. At the most basic level, a forum is about discussion. If you're going to cater to the 1% of people that can't handle such a basic concept without going into therapy, rather than the 99% of the rest of us who can handle things like grown ups, the forum dies. And such a death will be 100% self inflicted.
 
Joe’s policy with board features all along has been to make decisions based on what makes it easier for them to moderate. It’s why we have no images, no politics, etc. I do understand that mindset even though I think a decision like this is really granular and taking it to an extreme.

Point is this really shouldn’t be a surprise and I think it’s equally silly to leave a community you seemingly love based on the quantity of emojis you can use to respond to a post.

Also, I think we’re the only forum complaining about this. It’s business as usual in the Shark Pool from what I can see. Those making comments on how this is bad for the business model, I don’t think the FFA is a major part of FBGs business model or revenue stream.
 
Joe’s policy with board features all along has been to make decisions based on what makes it easier for them to moderate. It’s why we have no images, no politics, etc. I do understand that mindset even though I think a decision like this is really granular and taking it to an extreme.

Point is this really shouldn’t be a surprise and I think it’s equally silly to leave a community you seemingly love based on the quantity of emojis you can use to respond to a post.

Also, I think we’re the only forum complaining about this. It’s business as usual in the Shark Pool from what I can see. Those making comments on how this is bad for the business model, I don’t think the FFA is a major part of FBGs business model or revenue stream.
This is a result of the Shark Pool lol
 
joehan i appreciate the response and understand that it has to be a business decision for you and will support whatever decision you make on the front at the same time the people who were abusing the emojis know who they are and they should probably recognize that they are a bunch of dorks take that to the bank bromigos
 
I don't really care about the emoji per se, but the existence of this thread implies that we have some number of middle aged men hitting the report button because they got their feelings hurt by a digital smilie face. Perhaps the micro plastics are to blame.
Gen Z snowflakes over in the Shark Pool. Book it.

Guys, it's an emoji. I don't agree with removing it, but it's not that big a deal. Enjoy your Sunday!
Lost electricity so missed my Saints on TV. Now at work. So get off my lawn and my smilies. ( <----- Gen X archetype response.)
 
Hey guys you can still laugh at people it just takes extra steps. I guess it takes more effort maybe people won’t do it for stick

But it will make certain threads unreadable when you have quote after quote of smiles

Like this 😂
 
Joe has ruled, everyone has said their piece. Countdown to thread lock in 5….4….3….
Sure, why not lock the thread. Otherwise there might be too much discourse and potential disagreement. Ooh, scary.

End of the day this is Joe’s board. Whether or not I agree with his decisions, I’ll always respect that he operates with a pure intent and a degree of honesty & transparency that is rare.
 
My recollection was some people did report it back in the PSF days and it was discussed back then - however, 1. I could be wrong as my memory sucks and 2. I don’t even care.
You are right, and I remember, and I also know that's why people are assuming that is the reason for this current decision, but since Squis and GoBirds aren't really around much anymore, I don't see how it applies to this scenario. I think you would agree that's not proof.

I actually believe Joe when Joe gave his reason. I choose to not believe what everyone thinks is the reason, (with zero evidence,) while indirectly calling Joe a liar, as they decide his answer wasn't the truth.

Can anyone even point to one example of when this was happening lately, where someone was weaponizing the laugh emoji? I can't. Whereas the last time it was banned, everyone knew why, and there were plenty of examples. If no one has any examples, why would I even assume someone knows what they are talking about when they offer an alternative theory to Joe's explanation?

People were complaining, and need to toughen up? Yeah maybe, and maybe people who got an emoji taken away need to toughen up.
I think I might be a little lost. Why does assuming there must have been some reporting going = calling Joe a liar? Did he ever say there wasn't? I mean, from what I saw, he blamed it on the people who used the laughing inappropriately (and I think most here would agree that that is poor behavior, especially when specifically asked not to). But that doesn't mean there weren't also people with thin skins reporting the behavior, does it? Or did I miss something?
 
I think I might be a little lost. Why does assuming there must have been some reporting going = calling Joe a liar? Did he ever say there wasn't? I mean, from what I saw, he blamed it on the people who used the laughing inappropriately (and I think most here would agree that that is poor behavior, especially when specifically asked not to). But that doesn't mean there weren't also people with thin skins reporting the behavior, does it? Or did I miss something?
I don't think you missed anything.

Joe didn't say 'no one has reported anyone'. And I didn't say that there are no people with thin skins reporting behavior. You are asking me to prove a negative here, and I didn't theorize anything. I'm not the one making assumptions. I asked a question.

Joe gave an answer, they don't believe him. Maybe that's a nicer way to say it?
 
Back in the day when people thought the board was “better,” we didn’t have a like button at all.

Are people that addicted to the dopamine hit of a red number at the top of the page?
No. We are just too lazy to actually open up the emoticon thing and look for the laugh one.
Laugh it up. :lmao:

We used to just do these and if something was really funny you get progressively quoted with one more. Like reverse laugh pyramids.

Always felt like that process brought extra laughs.
That's just Brong man.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top