What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Please Read - "Who's Hottest?" Type Threads - And An Apology (1 Viewer)

Women you find oddly attractive gone too?
yep. That's fine, I needed to branch out more on the internet during the workday anyways.

Honestly Joe if you going to treat me like I'm 12 I will act like it. I used to buy a sub and not even use the thing ever, just did it to support the boards.  No right mind 12yo would do that so that is over.

 
People in any forum need to police themselves to some extent. Same holds true for the political forum. Maurile spent a lot of time moving posts into a new thread to try and inform/educate people on posts that we don’t want. Not sure it helped a whole lot though. The same cast of characters keep rehashing the same battles over and over again. Ban some and they are going to be back posting under an alias within minutes. The only way that place improves to where most of us would like it to be is if the active posters take it upon themselves to make it better. Not really sure heavy moderation will help as people don’t typically respond well to it. When someone gets suspended, they come back and report everything else that they think is over the line just to try and take others down with them. That creates a ton of noise and makes it hard to identify and remove the clearly objectionable content. 

Not really sure any of this is relevant to the current discussion in this thread though. 
Here’s some PSF ideas:

1. How about an emoji for :pleasedontdothat: that we can all use when someone starts being an ######

2. Force posters that spend time arguing with each other ALL the time (like Jon and Squisition) to put each other on ignore or risk a timeout 

3. Revoke/suspend thread starting privileges from users who start a thread that appears to be trolling (mods can be the judge of what is trolling).  Some of the worst threads over there are ones where someone is trying to provoke the other side.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here’s some PSF ideas:

1. How about an emoji for :pleasedontdothat: that we can all use when someone starts being an ######

2. Force posters that spend time arguing with each other ALL the time (like Jon and Squisition) to put each other on ignore or risk a timeout 

3. Revoke/suspend thread starting privileges from users who start a thread that appears to be trolling (mods can be the judge of what is trolling).  Some of the worst threads over there are ones where someone is trying to provoke the other side.
95% of the posts there are people trying to zing the other side, be snarky, or just flat out troll someone.  The whole thing is a cesspool and suspending one or two people won't change that because almost everyone there is guilty in some form.  How many threads there aren't someone trying to provoke the other side?  Out of those how many don't have a response in the first 10 replies that are trying to provoke someone?

 
No, of course that's not ok to say. But I think that's where context matters. I know enough of squistion to know I don't think that's how it was meant. And then the words following that said we can't allow talk like that. But I can see how it might be read wrong. But who knows, you could be right and I could be the one reading it wrong. But if you're wrong and there's a deletion or suspension, then the writer was wronged and it builds from there. That's part of the challenge with moderating. 
No that isn't how it was meant, as a blanket condemnation or generalization. I could have phrased it better. Thanks for giving me the benefit of the doubt. Would have commented on this sooner but didn't know I had been referenced in this thread.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
95% of the posts there are people trying to zing the other side, be snarky, or just flat out troll someone.  The whole thing is a cesspool and suspending one or two people won't change that because almost everyone there is guilty in some form.  How many threads there aren't someone trying to provoke the other side?  Out of those how many don't have a response in the first 10 replies that are trying to provoke someone?
I think the point is to try and clean it up by doing some self-policing.  There’s still some threads that are mostly good stuff (the 2018/2020 election threads come to mind.  I don’t think 95% of the posts are off-topic but some people just enjoy arguing - no offense but you seem to be one of them at times.  My personal philosophy is not to argue but put people on ignore.  I have people from both sides of the aisle and a lot of them on ignore - almost 60 or 70 people I think.  There’s really no reason to pay attention to the trolls or people who do nothing that cause arguments constantly.  That’s what children do.   

Anyway, I don’t want to hijack this any further as the PSF cleanup discussion was a tangent but thought I’d add my 2 cents as I enjoy spending time on both boards.  @Maurile Tremblay - if the topic of cleaning up the PSF is really something you guys are wanting input on then I could start a thread.  I don’t really care too much as I feel like my way works for me but happy to help facilitate a conversation.

 
They didn't think about it too much and exposed their self to more trouble than they stopped. Kinda funny the hot girls are out but apparently all girls are out from the speaker of excellent. ?

 
I think we all know Otis isn't really going to buy this place, and if he is considering it, I'd like to give him some competition. 

I'm only interested in the FFA, not the PSF or any other area here. 

While this section used to be beneficial for incremental revenue on this site, I believe you're just protecting the real business (and your legacy) with some of these changes, which from a business standpoint I understand. Furthermore, the FFA is no longer providing any real boost to FBG, in fact, I feel it is the opposite and more of a liability than anything else. It hasn't seen any new users in years, DAU's has steadily been declining for years, and let's be honest, it is nothing more than a headache for you and other mods. 

So that is my pitch, offering to give you money to detach this liability from your core business. I have no real intention of monetizing it, just bringing it back to the glory days I hear existed before I became a member, so I won't offer that much, as it would be strictly hobby/recreational for me, but I will make a fair offer on the sum of the parts. 

I'd like to detach the FFA completely from FBG to a new URL, something along the lines of FBGFFA.com or something along those lines, you'll have no liability for this section moving forward. My offer only has one stipulation so it can continue running seamlessly; I'd like an API feed built so that users can continue to login using their current credentials - I'm offering $2,500 (which when looking strictly at the sum of the FFA parts is above market value & a very fair offer).

- FC42

 
Why not go ahead and change the name to Footballpeople.com while you're at it. That way you don't offend the large chunk of female posters here.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think we all know Otis isn't really going to buy this place, and if he is considering it, I'd like to give him some competition. 

I'm only interested in the FFA, not the PSF or any other area here. 

While this section used to be beneficial for incremental revenue on this site, I believe you're just protecting the real business (and your legacy) with some of these changes, which from a business standpoint I understand. Furthermore, the FFA is no longer providing any real boost to FBG, in fact, I feel it is the opposite and more of a liability than anything else. It hasn't seen any new users in years, DAU's has steadily been declining for years, and let's be honest, it is nothing more than a headache for you and other mods. 

So that is my pitch, offering to give you money to detach this liability from your core business. I have no real intention of monetizing it, just bringing it back to the glory days I hear existed before I became a member, so I won't offer that much, as it would be strictly hobby/recreational for me, but I will make a fair offer on the sum of the parts. 

I'd like to detach the FFA completely from FBG to a new URL, something along the lines of FBGFFA.com or something along those lines, you'll have no liability for this section moving forward. My offer only has one stipulation so it can continue running seamlessly; I'd like an API feed built so that users can continue to login using their current credentials - I'm offering $2,500 (which when looking strictly at the sum of the FFA parts is above market value & a very fair offer).

- FC42
:lmao:    

 
To Squid's point - I buy a subscription every year.  Not necessarily because I need it to compete in my leagues.  But because I like it here and think it's the right thing to do.  I get value from the community. Not necessarily the "Spotlight - Julio Jones" articles.  But I pay anyway.  And no Joe, I don't want my money back. I'm just trying to express how people see Football Guys overall, not just the FFA.
Yep

 
I have never seen a bunch of dudes being so up in arms, calling others snowflakes and the like, just because someone tried to make a place a little more respectful of other human beings.

Oh wait, yes I have, I see it all the time.

 
I have never seen a bunch of dudes being so up in arms, calling others snowflakes and the like, just because someone tried to make a place a little more respectful of other human beings.

Oh wait, yes I have, I see it all the time.
You are 100% missing the point.

 
I think the point is to try and clean it up by doing some self-policing.  There’s still some threads that are mostly good stuff (the 2018/2020 election threads come to mind.  I don’t think 95% of the posts are off-topic but some people just enjoy arguing - no offense but you seem to be one of them at times.  My personal philosophy is not to argue but put people on ignore.  I have people from both sides of the aisle and a lot of them on ignore - almost 60 or 70 people I think.  There’s really no reason to pay attention to the trolls or people who do nothing that cause arguments constantly.  That’s what children do.   

Anyway, I don’t want to hijack this any further as the PSF cleanup discussion was a tangent but thought I’d add my 2 cents as I enjoy spending time on both boards.  @Maurile Tremblay - if the topic of cleaning up the PSF is really something you guys are wanting input on then I could start a thread.  I don’t really care too much as I feel like my way works for me but happy to help facilitate a conversation.
But nobody self-polices themselves.  They blame the other guy and act like they don't do anything just like children.  I didn't say 95% were off-topic just people being snarky and generally being an ###.  I think it applies to everyone in there except SID but obviously some more than others.  Anyway it is what it is at this point and still surprises me Joe is okay with that cesspool being okay here but discussion of women not being okay.

 
But nobody self-polices themselves.  They blame the other guy and act like they don't do anything just like children.  I didn't say 95% were off-topic just people being snarky and generally being an ###.  I think it applies to everyone in there except SID but obviously some more than others.  Anyway it is what it is at this point and still surprises me Joe is okay with that cesspool being okay here but discussion of women not being okay.
Totally agree, the one sided craziness allowed in there not being an issue while clothed women are is a bit confusing. At the same time it’s his board so it’s definitely his right to shape it around his views if he wants. 

 
Totally agree, the one sided craziness allowed in there not being an issue while clothed women are is a bit confusing. At the same time it’s his board so it’s definitely his right to shape it around his views if he wants. 
One is considered CNN/FOX etc the other is considered late night juvenile MTV debauchery.

The subject content is what makes some people uncomfortable. 

Someone has to think about the protecting the children.

 
One is considered CNN/FOX etc the other is considered late night juvenile MTV debauchery.

The subject content is what makes some people uncomfortable. 

Someone has to think about the protecting the children.
I totally see what you are saying, some of it was border line for sure but all in good fun(of what I saw and wasn’t a regular so may have missed some bad ones). The Pee Pool on the other hand is a very divisive venting thread for one side constantly attacking the POTUS and anyone that won’t bash him. Lot of hate in there.....is yoga pants truly worse...eh.  

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top