Figjam, ozboy et al start a million threads trolling other fans (usually Brisbane fans) and you leave them mostly alone, despite having zero content and zero facts behind them, feeding into their crap.

Then one thread gets started about Sydney by me and it's IMMEDIATELY closed?

I'm not saying it shouldn't have been, but if you're going to shut down my thread for trolling or whatever you need to lock other people's threads if they also have no substance.

Consistency is all I ask

Locked.




:P

Yesterday we locked many threads (6 in fact) about the Victory game and directed all traffic to the matchday thread, as we've come to the decision that the forum was getting overrun with too many unneccesary seperate threads.

I think we did miss one, but for the most part, we'll be consistently locking all threads similar to the 6 posted yesterday and the one you posted today.

So what about -

http://au.fourfourtwo.com/forums/default.aspx?g=posts&t=64553
http://au.fourfourtwo.com/forums/default.aspx?g=posts&t=64459
http://au.fourfourtwo.com/forums/default.aspx?g=posts&t=64338

?

Those threads have some form of substance, apart from maybe the Diving thread, but that was a major talking point. Your thread was nothing more than a bunch of trolling, bias and conspiracy theories.

The first one is the one that I was referring to.
The second one was from Friday - before the match. It was discussing Brisbane and Ange, not the match in particular. What I am talking about is moving all match related threads and discussion into the one thread. Again, like the first one you posted and this one and this one and this one.

Same going for the third.

EDIT: And what Funky said.

Edited by imnofreak: 6/11/2011 08:48:15 PM

Really? Substance? Are you serious?

So if I made a 'Which team will be the next team to benefit from a pro-Sydney refereeing decision' thread it'd be OK? That's what you're saying? Because it's not related directly to the match itself?

Sure, go ahead. And then everyone will laugh at you like they've been laughing at Figjam, and you'll be much better for it.

:-k So basically you don't want to do anything about those threads because we're all laughing at how retarded they are?

I would have thought a Brisbane fan would have loved all three of those threads. All three reflect very poorly on the Victory fan who started them, and afford fans of pretty much every other franchise the opportunity to point out how good Roar are (or how dumb the comments are).

Sounds like scouse is having a sook for no reason.

I think the best way to be consistent is to just lock any thread scouse makes.

Then you'll be 100% consistent.

Not saying I don't love them, just that the threads that are kept open and the threads that are closed appear to have little in common - basically, WHY THE FUCK CAN'T I TROLL SYDNEY FANS?!?!?!!?!!!!!!1one

Because Sydney fans dish it out but can't take it.

I say that due to abuse by a minuscule section of the forum, we take away the ability for everyone to create new threads - just like we did with polls.

Imagine how quiet the place would get :lol:

I think you're onto something.. :-k :-k

Can only comment on 442 articles :-k :twisted: ;)

Would moderators still be able to create threads? Joffa would have a melt down otherwise.

Joffa would have complete control over AF :shock:

1% of the forumites hold 100% of the power to create polls.

Occupy 442.

We'll ban Joffa from creating threads also, purely for the lolz

paulc currently "doing a scouse_ozboy_figjam" in AF.

I love how Scouse is a grown man and yet he takes the piss out of school boys like figjam hahaa.

Keep up the good work!

Occupy 442: the protest where nobody knows what they're talking about.
Regular 442: the forum where nobody knows what they're talking about.

Sounds like business as usual.

...51,623 posts and you still don't know what you're talking about ;)




On a serious note though, I do note a little inconsistency with the mods at times. Some seem to take offence at certain things a bit more than others, and there have been situations where one or two people in particular have gone "waaaaaa make that guy remove that pic" and it's been actioned, but similar pics haven't been removed when these people haven't complained.

I'm not saying that certain posters/teams/442 posting gangs are being favoured, but highlighting that there does seem to be a "moderate by request" rather than "moderate according to clear rules" attitude.

I think that's because we don't all go into every thread. We can only moderate what we can see, and the end, sometimes it us up to you guys to complain to us so we can know somethings been done.

Also worth noting that if people are complaining about one pic, but not the other, maybe the other isn't that offensive?

I can understand where you're coming from, but I can guarantee you, we don't favour any one person/place/team when moderating. We just try our best, and have to judge each situation as it comes.

Okay, so why are ozboy threads that were closed now reopened?

THE MODS CAN'T READ!!!!!1111One :oops: :lol:


What I was trying to illustrate is the following sort of example:

Person A posts down syndrome kid "arguing with people on the internet..." meme pic in thread X, person B complains, mod removes pic.

Person C posts exact same pic / graphical variant on same meme in thread Y, pic isn't removed.



IMHO if something is to be removed it is because it breaks a rule, not because someone has requested it be removed.

:lol:
I did read what you said, was just re-affirming the point:p

I completely understand that example, but my point was, it's entirely possible that no mod happened to go into Thread Y. We've made the decision to crack down a bit more in the future, because we feel things have been let go a bit, and consistency for things like that will be part of it.



Er, that thread wasn't re-opened. He's started a thread with the same title, but a completely different point. While it's a stupidly made point, that's no reason to lock the thread.

I will post a response later. At the moment I can barely type on account of my hands' incessant shaking from the case of energy drinks I've downed today.

There may not be a later if you've consumed that many energy drinks :lol:

You should just cut to the chase and ban Ozboy.

I could suggest a few others, too... :-"

f1dave's intolerence of mindless dribble: the reason I'll never be a 442 mod ;)





P.S irresponsible moderating there Marty. What if the spambots attack? WE WILL BE HELPLESS!!!! :lol:

Quite the contrary, with his Energy drink induced super speed, Marty will be able to delete threads, 5 at a time :D

Including all the legitimate ones. :P

There are no legitimate threads, just slightly less wrong opinions.

He'll be like Fry when he drinks 100 cups of coffee :lol:



Edited by Erebus: 8/11/2011 10:06:28 AM

I think this is exactly why you SHOULD be a mod. Or maybe not, should we really be wishing that on anyone?

It seemed to work for a couple of the others :lol:

I take it all back.

Make me a mod, the cleansing wind of justice will blow through this place within 24 hours, and then I will step down.

Hah. Some days, there'd be barely any threads left once I was done... :oops:

I hope your response is with your tongue firmly planted in your cheek, Erebus.

The fact that you can't tell worries me, Decentric.

The Dutch coaching course didn't include a lesson in sarcasm.






(cheek is bleeding from amount of tongue currently impaled in it)

In all seriousness though, how many times does user MarkD have to have comments like 'hate gays' and 'fuck poo-pushers' edited before someone actually bans him?

My thoughts about MarkD/Self plug

[youtube]euXQbZDwV0w[/youtube]


Edited by afromanGT: 11/11/2011 11:43:49 PM

Hehe

I'm going to enjoy this time while Heineken and Figjam are both banned. :cool:

When, what, where, how?

Nevermind, I found it. Add that davidbloop guy to the banned list. :lol:


Edited by ducky42: 12/11/2011 10:25:15 AM

I guess there are a few treading a fine line. Can a mod please edit out the derogatory references to spastics on page 5 of the "Worst Player" in AF

Done.

May I ask an honest question? If members have been banned for inflammatory posts targeting Jewish or disabled people - why not is notorganic being reviewed for his anti-catholic posts in the silent majority/touchy subjects thread. Is it now fair game to target individual groups in society in such a manner? I doubt that's what we all would agree is a nice place to visit.

If people were banned for anti-Catholic posts you'd have to ban half the forum.

And that would be fine by me, maybe people would then learn that bigotry is not acceptable. Bigotry is still bigotry no matter which group it is aimed at scouse.

Your letting yourself and your reputation down by posting the tripe you posted in the touchy subjects thread today.

Bigotry is the intolerance towards someone with a differing view then your own, your post showed you are clearly intolerant towards people with religious faith, simply because you are not a man of faith yourself. Absolute textbook bigotry, which is allegedly against forum rules, although the mods clearly seem to have forgotten that.

Edited by RJL25: 13/11/2011 02:12:53 PM

I just noticed this. Don't make up a new meaning for bigotry, please. Good fucking god, you just caught 99.9% of the worlds population in your net.



Edited by skeptic: 13/11/2011 03:24:02 PM

How was anything I posted unacceptable?

unacceptable in my view, plenty disagree and thats fine. I've explained my view thoroughly in the touchy subjects thread, i'll discuss it with you there.

big·ot·ry

noun, plural -ries.
1. stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own.

I actually think I've got the definition spot on skeptic

Skeptic's failed attempts at being bombastic time and again amaze me.

And your failed attempts at appearing intelligent, experienced and expert in every bloody subject (example, trying to pretend to be an expert in advanced driving courses when one has never had a driving licence?) though your barely out of your teens, plus the ability to have such a full life one can waste half of it on a damn forum posting at a ridiculous frequency and then boasting about it while the other children display their personal envy for such a wonderful feat and pray that perhaps one day they too can have similar success in life, amaze me also.

Edited by skeptic: 13/11/2011 11:41:49 PM

big·ot·ry

noun, plural -ries.
1. stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own.

I actually think I've got the definition spot on skeptic [/quote]

You do eh? I have a complete intolerance for much of the libs work place and immigration policies. I hold the same for the opinions of insularity and would be hatred of many aleague fans towards other sports and their fans. I hold a complete intolerance for the opinions and beliefs that allow the stereotyping of the indigenous kids in town by many. I hold a complete intolerance for the beliefs of fundamentalist practices such as the use of children as spokespeople in door to door preaching and a myriad of other opinions and beliefs.

Now all you need to do is label me a bigot also and the forum will be well on their way towards silencing criticism of religion. Hell, as a known bigot I'll also be nullified in regards to debating indigenous affairs as well as any thing else. You blokes are too smart for me.

I lol'd.

Combination overdrive
Right hook, short-arm jab one-two,one-two,one-two
Left hook, upper-cuts frantic super speed-combo's
Sets up feet firmly planted in near perfect position, clicks brain into haymaker-mode

How is Afro going to stem this barrage!?

Stay tuned

:lol:

You know advanced driving courses and holding your drivers licence are mutually exclusive in this country, right? One doesn't mandate the other. And really, if that's STILL the only bone you can pick in 50,000+ posts, who's rreally the joke here? Not to mention that I clearly don't profess to know everything there is to know and if you did even the slightest research before launching your ill-conceived attack on my character you'd know that there are many threads that I don't offer up my opinion in because they simply don't interest me or I have no knowledge of the topic matter.

Of course, your intolerance of anyone else's opinion or existence pretty much backs up your own stupidity once again, getting a thread that had made it to some 80 pages closed in ET thanks to your own foolhardy arrogance and a complete lack of understanding of the basics of human interaction. Listing priests accused of sex crimes and attacking anybody who stood by the beliefs they were raised with - and a freedom to choose that belief which you possess but refuse to afford to others - is just an embarrassment.

Then of course there's the fact that if I am indeed the feeble "barely out of my teens" failure that you're suggesting I am, what kind of disgrace of a human being does that make you as an apparently fully-grown alpha male (:lol:) for incessantly attacking my beliefs and lifestyle? You're not just a keyboard warrior like the rest on here, you are the epitome of a hypocrite (as demonstrated in the previous paragraph). And like ozboy, The Frederick and davstar, you are a complete embarrassment to the intelligence of many people on this forum, trying vehemently to do exactly what you've just derided and impress the 'children' on here by attacking me.

You're nothing more than a leprous limb that for SOME reason thinks it's better than the rest of us because you tried and failed to use a few big words. Go figure.