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!
This site needs an ombudsman (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Mr. Pickles
- Start date
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
Dear Blotis,Of course I kid about the executions, but I think we're better off going no werewolf. This is a resource allocation issue. If these talented posters would like to come back, I think we'd all welcome them with open arms, and in some cases, power boners.
Be sure to catch Survivor: Nicaragua, Wednesdays this Fall, right here on CBS,
MP
The Future Champs
Footballguy
How about a dedicated, pinned thread that features all the aliases that have been put on time-outs or banned? It could be organized by either when the TO was issued, or when the parole comes up. Many drafts and threads have been ruined by TOs, and this might help. A brief description of their infraction might add to the thread value.
I'm picturing a lineup of avatars behind bars, or an "FBI Most Wanted" style poster.
I'm picturing a lineup of avatars behind bars, or an "FBI Most Wanted" style poster.
Otis
Footballguy
Picks,
I've got some great ideas I've been drumming up while sleeping at night. I'm thinking about promoting a self-moderating initiative, whereby We The Posters moderate the board. The upside is that the FFA gets the level of moderation that the FFA itself wants, and Joe and the fellas have more time for all that wacky football predicting/gambling stuff.
How would you feel about something like this? I've already got Keith working behind the scenes on some logistics for a beta rollout, and I really think this would be huge. I also would envision the ombudsman taking on a larger role in this sort of scheme.
Thanks,
Totes
I've got some great ideas I've been drumming up while sleeping at night. I'm thinking about promoting a self-moderating initiative, whereby We The Posters moderate the board. The upside is that the FFA gets the level of moderation that the FFA itself wants, and Joe and the fellas have more time for all that wacky football predicting/gambling stuff.
How would you feel about something like this? I've already got Keith working behind the scenes on some logistics for a beta rollout, and I really think this would be huge. I also would envision the ombudsman taking on a larger role in this sort of scheme.
Thanks,
Totes
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
Dear Mr. Oat,This sounds like a radical new approach to moderating, and frankly I'm not seeing how it will work. Can you provide some additional details? If you already have Keith working on a beta rollout, this is already above my pay grade.My personal preference is a FAIR MODERATION! system where things are handled based on a consumption model. Lower tier posters will have some additional slack, which I arbitrarily call a "prebate," whereas more established posters will be subject to the normal standard with a suspension rate commensurate with posting volume and line stepping.We'll need some upper tier folks to implement this new system, but I think it's worth a serious look.My sticky paws were into making straws out of big fat slurpy treats. An incredible eight foot heap,MP
Hoart Petterson
Footballguy
Is it still OK to post links to nude photos as long as they're hidden in emoticons? 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, but the racists ones are out of bounds..Is it still OK to post nude photos in emoticons?
Zaxxon
Footballguy
I think we take this a step further and report ourselves as soon as we make a post that might be the slightest bit questionable.
This might result in leniency for the perpetrator as they willingly drew attention to the potential offense.
Ignoratio Elenchi
Footballguy
Mr. Pickles,
Hypothetically, let's say a fellow FBG published a great story, and I started a thread to show my appreciation and discuss the story with other fans. What are some reasons such a thread would disappear?
Yours in Christ,
Iggy
Hypothetically, let's say a fellow FBG published a great story, and I started a thread to show my appreciation and discuss the story with other fans. What are some reasons such a thread would disappear?
Yours in Christ,
Iggy
Celph Titled
Footballguy
My goal is to simply entertain/be entertained, and engage in conversations with, my iFriends. I get the feeling that you're not big on socializing in general, but oftentimes there is no greater purpose to it other than spending time or having discussions with the people you enjoy. Mr Pickles, since you're the ombudsman here, do you think I've answered Smoo's questions sufficiently?
Last edited by a moderator:
videoguy505
Footballguy
WIRED covered a self-moderating/anti-troll system a while back. IIRC, the gist of it is that every 24 hour period, 1/365th of the board membership is given (either known to them or in secret) ranking power. During each member's day of ranking power, how they rate other posters (in a fashion similar to the 5-star rating system we use here) is used to develop a rank for each poster. All members have the ability to control their view level... some may choose to show only posts & threads from 3+ star posters, others from 2+ star posters, or whatever. However, each forum member remains unaware of their own ranking and the rankings of others.What ends up happening is the trolls... the Jim11s, LHUCKS, and timsochets of the board, start off posting as usual, but, after a couple of months of earning a 0- or 1-star rank, get bored of no one ever responding to them (since no one sees their posts in the first place) and leave. Or, they don't leave, but no one sees their posts anyway, so no one cares.Since the moderating power is so divided, the cliques cannot band together either and push rankings down too far on their own or elevate themselves... only having 1 day a year to be the mod isn't enough to overcome the large numbers of members... especially if they don't know which date their rankings are being counted.It's like a global ignore list across the board, decided upon by the community itself. If a alias-IP checking system were instituted in parallel, preventing the BGPs and Peens's of the board from returning under new names once their old ones earn a 0-star rank, the board would quickly become permanently self-correcting.
QuizGuy66
Footballguy
This post alone has me close to a Pickles endorsement myself.
And I don't even think Mr. P really likes me. 
I will say though, Pickles, that you should get a Bryant boat in the deal, just in case a Shick!-like (or is it Shick!-esque, you tell me) situation should arise. It will help you make a hasty and safe getaway.-QG
Last edited by a moderator:
dharmapunk
Footballguy
Videoguy,This sounds like a great idea. However, a member I represent would like to know he can purchase a higher member rating under this system. ThanksDP
Psychopav
Help us, Joebi-Wan Brynobi, you're our only ho
Nicely done, Canadien.quote name='Celph Titled' post='12159425' date='Aug 14 2010, 12:07 AM'
The premise/responses are funny because Joe and David are two extremely different guys. On Easter, I'm sure Joe went to church, and had a nice family dinner, and had a very safe, G-rated, lovely day. Meanwhile, David participated in this: link dressed as Elmo. Dodds, and I mean this in the best possible way, is a maniac. His postings here about poker, while delightful, are the work of a crazy person. That, to me, is funny. Or at least potentially funny.I also find it funny that you find me as a source of problems ont his board when your name is synonymous on this board with not paying money owed. What was the reason for that, anyway?That's a poor judging standard.Answer this for me: what was the purpose of that thread you started earlier about Joe and David? I suspect that its sole purpose for you was to get them all riled up. And that's lame.It seems that I'm pretty well-liked around here.
I've done many things in my past that have riled up Joe and David, but it was always just a side effect of something else. A heated argument, an amusing theme in a thread, whatever. The difference here is for you, stirring the #### is your primary mission. And that's just weak.
You're a naturally funny guy and have a good wit. I just really wish you'd use it more constructively.
/quote
To whom do I money? Give me a name, I'll send them a check.
This is what I've been saying. You don't have a clue what you're talking about and are just trying to cause chaos. To what end? What is your goal, and why are you doing it? It's not productive. You're actively attempting to tear down a community. That's sociopathic.
Psychopav
Help us, Joebi-Wan Brynobi, you're our only ho
desert rose
Footballguy
The Welsh are notorious troublemakers. It wouldn't surprise me a bit if there were monetary improprieties.
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
Hello videoguy505,This is very interesting. I wonder how well it would work here. Is this something that can be implemented with Invision software?I have enjoyed shaming Konotay, but it takes a lot of work, and in my new capacity as unofficial ombudsman, I don't really have time for that kind of nonsense.Elegantly wasted,MP
Celph Titled
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Samuel L Bronkowitz
Footballguy
Mr Pickles,How can we help our good friend Bob help his friend?Also, I can guarantee that I'm not well known around your parts of the internet (i.e. LABS, 11, OBC....####, I don't even know if I'm doing the abbreviations right). But I feel like I'm good people. I may not contribute daily shtick by any means but I feel I'm still an established member of the community (even back to old yeller). How does one rate in your system if one has a 2 post-per-day limit? Is one penalized for not "contributing"?
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
Dear Celph,
I think Smoo has a point here, actually. You have a history of blatant line-stepping and button-pushing. Is it entertaining? Most of the time, yes, but the trail of alias dead left in your wake suggests that you might want to tone down the tool factor going forward. I think you've done that, but what worries me is that it's partially motivated by the repeated bannings you've received which is actually an argument in their favor.
You have a pretty long and infamous history. Some of the bans were justified, others not at all. It's hard to apply consistent moderation when the poster behind the aliai is not consistent himself.
Can't you hear me knocking (down your dirty street.. yeah!),
MP
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
Dear Kyle Broflovski,As to Bob's problem, I don't want this to turn into Loveline, so I'll skip that one.I admit that I don't know much of your work, but you appear to be an alias, so that might explain why I'm drawing a blank.As to rating, I think you are referring to the tier system that was introduced some years ago? While that was never *** OFFICIAL *** and kind of took on a life of its own, it did a nice job of either ranking people into useful groups and/or making people completely crazy and insecure. I kind of enjoyed both.Posters that have limited contributions are actually some of my favorites. You just have to make them count.Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted (Albert Einstein),MP
Psychopav
Help us, Joebi-Wan Brynobi, you're our only ho
If I take this to the next level, would we need to bring in Mad Cow, or would the Ombudsman be able to step in? I guess I'm a little confused about the role here. I thought an Ombudsman would act as a critical mouthpiece to the legitimate board establishment, not as some sort of peer mediator.
Samuel L Bronkowitz
Footballguy
Mr. Pickles,Thank you for answering my post. My name is actually Samuel L Bronkowitz, not Kyle Broflovski.
Yes you are correct that I am an alias, hence the June 2010 join date. My original username was strykerpks, who(m?) is having a nice season until 2012. That may or may not give you an idea as to my iIdentity but thats beside the point.
I was not asking about "tiering". I have always considered myself "mid-upper-lower tier". I'm not one to strive to be "upper" or "elite" tier. Perhaps thats later for me, but I'm happy where I'm at.
I was specifically asking about your moderating idea of :
Sorry, I should have clarified my question from the beginning, but I'm learning still....Where would that put a certain person who has been around, has stepped on a toe here and there, but for the most part remains anonymous? Is someone like me considered "Lower tier"? I guess it does come back to "tiering" but I think that idea may be outdated with 30,000 members.That said, I am glad to see that you will answer a question from anyone regardless of "FFA status"
Regards,
Sam
PS I have been doing landscaping in 90 degree heat for 9 hours plus I've had a lot to drink so my thoughts may be incoherent.
Last edited by a moderator:
YSR
Footballguy
Mr. Pickles,
Long time, first time.
Will any special consideration (positive or negative - given some of the history here) be given to female posters?
I only ask because sometimes St. Louis Bob gives me that certain creepy vibe and I'm just curious to know if our collective honor is to be protected.
YIC,
YSR
Long time, first time.
Will any special consideration (positive or negative - given some of the history here) be given to female posters?
I only ask because sometimes St. Louis Bob gives me that certain creepy vibe and I'm just curious to know if our collective honor is to be protected.
YIC,
YSR
Celph Titled
Footballguy
Interesting response. A few points:1) Chalking up as many TO's and aliai as possible isn't interesting to me. I think the sheer absurdity of it used to be amusing, but I see some posters who are continuously getting banned, and it's generally for stupid and/or uninteresting comments. I think I've been given a short timeout either once or twice this year. Although my history is fairly checkered, my current ban-rate is level with other humorous non-choirboys. In that regard, I think the "tool factor", as you put it, has been turned down.Dear Celph,
I think Smoo has a point here, actually. You have a history of blatant line-stepping and button-pushing. Is it entertaining? Most of the time, yes, but the trail of alias dead left in your wake suggests that you might want to tone down the tool factor going forward. I think you've done that, but what worries me is that it's partially motivated by the repeated bannings you've received which is actually an argument in their favor.
You have a pretty long and infamous history. Some of the bans were justified, others not at all. It's hard to apply consistent moderation when the poster behind the aliai is not consistent himself.
Can't you hear me knocking (down your dirty street.. yeah!),
MP
2) Sometimes it's funny to be clever and clean, sometimes it's funny to be absurd/blatant/dirty (see: Bob Sacamano's kamikaze mission earlier this week). I try to reserve comments/topics in the latter for other forums (see: Homer's iCarly thread), and the times when I've blatantly line-stepped over here are fairly few and far-between.
3) All that said, it's hard for me to believe that **** jokes are "destroying" FBG's. I'm not that powerful, nor are **** jokes. On the "ability to destroy FBG's" scale, I think **** jokes are far behind the ideologically-blind political posters, the bigots, and the women. Similarly, it's hard for me to believe that asking Smoo about his smoo'ing someone is contributing to the demise of said forum.
Celph Titled
Footballguy
I was just kidding about the women, btw. Except Early.
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
Dear Stanley R. Marsh,That was a lot of words, and I'm still not sure I understand your question or concern. I think if you're a "lay low" kind of guy, you'll be fine under any system that we implement.
As to the tiering concept being "outdated" with 40k+ members, remember that roughly 85% of these are aliai and most of them are pretty awful/forgettable. Frankly, I think we need this system more than ever.
Everything counts in large amounts,
MP
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
Dear Bovine Encephalitis,I think you've gone through some interesting phases in your time here. Back in the day of !, you were probably targeted unfairly after a few incidents. You got a target on your back, it became personal, and you were iced, bro. In the time since, you have line-stepped a fair amount, but I do agree that your taunting has largely died down. I think the tool factor is at about a 4/10 which is pretty mild.
I agree with you that many of the groups you mentioned are more guilty of "ruining" this place than those who post with an "edgy" style. Werewolf participants were pretty guilty, and fortunately they opted for self-exile. I think the change has been refreshing and noticeable. This makes me wonder about the self-moderated idea mentioned above, and which groups would be voted off the island more quickly. It would be an interesting experiment. I think the white noise generators would probably get the hook pretty quickly, and that would be a good thing.
As to Smoo, he did some Grade A smooing at one point in the past, but I don't think that's been a problem for a while now. Smoomendous Smooside is much more likely to smoo your league than Smoo himself. I think he rightly deserves ire. Actually, I think anyone who pilfers funds or is really slow to pay is worthy of mockery. Smoo is no exception. You do seem to be forgetting that Smoo is an irascible fellow. It doesn't take much to set him off.
All in all, I think you're headed in the right direction. I'd like to see some people get their old names back as I think the practice of banning people and allowing new names is a buncha nonsense. I was pretty partial to Truck IV: A New Hope, though. Maybe you'd be happy with that one?
Hurry in to your Bay Area Buick dealer, because this 0% APR offer won't last long,
MP
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
Dear Young Sir Robin,First off, there are no women on the internet, so naturally I'm really suspicious of your claim. What "females" have appeared on this site have been either autonomous bots or aliai of Joe T (e.g., Mac Artist).
As to your question about Mr. SLB, let me ask you this: have you received any personal messages from him? If yes, what did they say? Bob seems like a nice enough fellow, but I'm aware of certain aberrant behavior which might scare away some people, including alleged females. I can only imagine how things might get out of hand in a less public forum.
My advice is to forward me everything you have (except for the #### shots), and I'll give you my best advice.
As an unmuddied lake, Fred. As clear as an azure sky of deepest summer. You can rely on me, Fred,
MP
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
And we're back. 
AhrnCityPahnder
Yinz-o-riffic
I got my 1/365th moderation powers and yanked this thing back from the abyss.And we're back.
Giant Wooden Badger
the Beav
Thread has a gray streak in it's fro now. Weird.And we're back.
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
Man, this is a tough one.My initial instinct is to cry foul, much like Jason Sobel and Ian Poulter. I can actually see it both ways here. The PGA did point out to golfers that certain areas that may be considered bunkers even if they don't have a rake (in fact most do not). They also mentioned that some areas may be confusing to distinguish due to foot traffic. There was at least some attempt to make golfers aware of the unusual layout of this course.BobbyLayne said:WB MPOpinion on the Dustin Johnson ruling?And we're back.
However, I have some problems with this for a few reasons:
1. The PGA allowed the gallery to crowd Johnson prior to his shot from the "bunker." Basically, people were on top of it before the ball arrived, and the gallery only opened up direct line of sight to allow him to hit the shot. Officials should have moved people out of there at a minimum, but more ideally the gallery shouldn't have been allowed to stand on the bunker in the first place. Johnson didn't have context because he couldn't see what the layout looked like around his immediate hitting area. I think he reasonably assumed that, if the gallery was allowed to trample all over that area, it couldn't have been a bunker. By not moving people away from his hitting area, he couldn't reach an appropriate conclusion about his hitting surface. Neither he nor his caddy gave it a second thought, and it seems plausible that no one in the gallery did either since they were standing on the damn thing.
2. I don't know if Johnson admitted to grounding the club, but the replay was inconclusive. I think you need absolute no doubt evidence to assess someone a two stroke penalty.
3. I think given the confusing nature of the layout, a rules official should have mentioned to Johnson that his ball was in a bunker. For whatever reason they didn't enforce the usual practice of keeping people out of the trap, so lacking proper context, I think they owed him the suggestion that he was in the bunker.
I realize that the PGA is more of a rules stickler than most sports ruling bodies, but this is becoming absurd. It's probably one reason why people find it to be inaccessible and snobby. Not only did Johnson not clearly ground his club on replay, but he gained zero advantage from his pre-shot routine (grounding or not) and had no idea that the area was considered a bunker. I don't know if that particular bunker was marked with blue dots or whatever they were supposed to use as identifiers, but even if it was, he probably couldn't see any markings due to the crowding of the gallery.
I think rules should be handled consistently, so I can see why the PGA did what they did. I'm sure this has come up before, but I think the particular situation was exacerbated by the PGA's poor handling of the gallery. I've never seen a player more pinned in by the crowd than on that shot.
I do agree with others that Johnson should have probably known better, especially given the special notice posted by the PGA regarding this issue prior to the start of the tournament. Never let the rules officials have a say over your play. When in doubt, ask someone for advice. The trouble I see here is that he had no idea it was even possible he could be in a bunker. To me, that's the fault of the course officials. However, I can see how Johnson should have been more wary about hitting off of sand, which he clearly was. The course does have a sandy soil, so I can see the confusion, but any time a golfer sees sand they should almost instinctively not ground their club pre-shot.
The whole thing is a shame. I have a feeling Johnson threw a rage in the locker room, followed by crying his eyes out. It sure looked that way.
Last edited by a moderator:
St. Louis Bob
Footballguy
YSR said:
Sweatpants
Footballguy
mr. furley
Footballguy
great sig
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
Dear GB Tiger Fan,I suppose if Beckster is pondering a return, then anything is possible. As I recall, cocoagirl was a big werewolfer. I wonder if this will influence her decision to return.MP
Last edited by a moderator:
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
Thanks MP. I actually deleted my post (in case you were wondering why it disappeared mysteriously a la threads around here); upon reflection, I felt it might be beyond the scope of the FFA Ombudsman, and I don't want to see you get bogged. Doing great work here.
Here's a valid Ombudsman Q, though...we have these "WTF happened to that great thread?" situations. Then we have these threads that should but don't/won't die, in fact they breed poles and lateral threads (WTC mosque comes to mind).
Wonder if we could work out a trading system with the Ogar in charge of the FFA dungeon. Did you ever see The Tale of Despereaux? No? Well, they had a castle, and down in the dungeon was a jailer. I kind of think of FFA deleted threads are like that.
Somewhere out there is a forum - accessible only by mods - and inside are all of Tanner and Trucks threads, along with some perfect great threads that had one or two over the line posts that got them banishment. Soooooooooooo....wouldn't it just be the berries if, say, we could trade a crappy political thread, which only 2-3 trolls are posting to anyway, for a perfectly worthy thread that got mucked up?
I realize you have no genuine power as self-appointed Ombudsman, but I feel with The resurrection, combined with explicit approval by Joe B, plus the widespread acclaim you are receiving....well, it's snowballing, and I everyone would agree that by the end of the month you'll probably be running this place. I'm pretty sure you can make this happen.
Here's a valid Ombudsman Q, though...we have these "WTF happened to that great thread?" situations. Then we have these threads that should but don't/won't die, in fact they breed poles and lateral threads (WTC mosque comes to mind).
Wonder if we could work out a trading system with the Ogar in charge of the FFA dungeon. Did you ever see The Tale of Despereaux? No? Well, they had a castle, and down in the dungeon was a jailer. I kind of think of FFA deleted threads are like that.
Somewhere out there is a forum - accessible only by mods - and inside are all of Tanner and Trucks threads, along with some perfect great threads that had one or two over the line posts that got them banishment. Soooooooooooo....wouldn't it just be the berries if, say, we could trade a crappy political thread, which only 2-3 trolls are posting to anyway, for a perfectly worthy thread that got mucked up?
I realize you have no genuine power as self-appointed Ombudsman, but I feel with The resurrection, combined with explicit approval by Joe B, plus the widespread acclaim you are receiving....well, it's snowballing, and I everyone would agree that by the end of the month you'll probably be running this place. I'm pretty sure you can make this happen.
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
Hello, Otis.
Das Boot
Footballguy
Interesting....I think it would only work if people didn't know their votes were only effective one day a year though... otherwise the effortvideoguy505 said:
of rating good and bad threads would be seen as wasted effort for 99%+ of the time.They would also have to remove the quote function, otherwise everyone would see stuff from people they didn't want to anyway.This has possibilities though.
Das Boot
Footballguy
Better yet, just delete the one or two over the line posts and reinstate the entire thread.Wa la!
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
Apparently that takes up too much time, Das Boot.
It clearly makes the most sense, but that is beside the point.
It clearly makes the most sense, but that is beside the point.
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
Dear Mr. Layne,
While it would be great to resurrect old deleted threads, I think our best shot to fix this problem is to avoid having them sacked in the first place.
I think the biggest limitation to the idea of getting an appeal heard on some of these "borderline" threads is time. Moderation takes a lot of it, and there's no real incentive to make more work for those already struggling to keep this place cleaned up.
The faceless mod concept was originally designed to avoid people seeking out retribution over moderating decisions. That's fine, but it also makes it more difficult to understand why something was axed or who to talk to if there is a legitimate question. This thread was taken down without any message to me or any warning. It just disappeared. The only way it was saved was through enough support from the community. I didn't have to ask for it back, the will of the people prevailed.
I suppose we could try to find a system to bring back old threads, but I think we have a more fundamental issue to address with why things disappear in the first place. The question of "where is the line" is still as relevant as ever.
One, two, three, four, I declare a thumb war
,MP
Last edited by a moderator:
