Every poster of this forum has a time limit of a certain amount between when they can post replies, and the same should be the case for Joffa when he goes on his obvious attention seeking poll creation threads. I mean seriously, the bloke not only posts 10 news articles at the same time, but then creates something like 8 fucking polls simultaneously.

I'm all for news and polls, but give it a rest. If that bloke has the ability to judge threads as "closeworthy" simply because there are butthurt fans - wait a second, is this a sports forum with fans from separate teams?! - then the nonce needs to realise that his spamming of an ENTIRE page of a forum only stifles discussion.

Joffa is a decent mod, but he's about as consistent as Strebre fucking Delovski.

If you're going to close threads because people are offended by them when their sole purpose is for banter, well, don't go pasting an entire wall of shit on the front page of the forum.

Edited by pv4: 4/3/2015 07:24:01 AM

Joffa is not a decent mod.

Does Joffa actuall mod anything or does he just spam?

I like Joffa, but I disagree with his decision to lock that thread. The WSW trolling was pretty contained to that thread, and I'm sure he'll regret it, once he remembers that now all those posts go back to being in every single thread, instead of one.

Spam.

-PB

Joffa is shit. Relies on Spam posts and then bans everything else

Maybe the polls could be reduced.

However, I think it is good that 442 posters cut and paste football articles from other sites. Whether it is Joffa, Joffabot and recently Paladisious, it is good visiting this site and finding football articles posted from other sites.

Maybe it would look better if more posters posted articles than mainly Joffa and Joffabot? Arthur and Damo Baresi have added plenty of excellent, informative articles over the last few years.

I'd cut and paste articles to 442 more often, but I don't see that many worth posting.

I also don't like seeing threads set up that can be construed as launching personal attacks on other 442 posters. It is not constructive. Comment on the idea not the person.




Edited by Decentric: 20/2/2015 12:42:16 AM

[-x [-x [-x :lol:

You think it's good to take income away from content creators for the benefit of Haymarket Media's ad revenue?

Noooooope

Edited by pv4: 20/2/2015 01:06:33 PM

[-x

You must've conducted polls then.[-x

Edited by Decentric: 20/2/2015 04:06:09 PM

Hmmm

The answer is to shut down the forums, then.

The gist of it was "joffa has banned me a bunch of times for doing the same things that heaps of other people do".

With lots of expletive pejoratives.

Okay I've had enough of this.](*,)

Many of the posters criticising Joffa, although not all, as some are pretty positive people, spend a lot of time on this forum winding each other up, and seeing the negative in most issues pertaining to football.

I can see a few posters cutting and pasting articles and too many polls as a minor issue, but basically didn't Joffa set up the excellent World Cup section on this forum?

Why not give some credit where it is due? Most of us loved the World Cup and Asian Cup sections.

One of the strengths of 442 forum, is that the constant link to articles on the 442 site, about football, and people cutting and pasting, or linking articles from 442 and other sites, encourages football discussion.

I've been posting on forums for 9 years. The 442 site is the best this country has seen.

Why can't a few others see this too? No site is perfect, but 16 000 members and a high number of regular posters is testament to all to that is good about 442.

A number of us have forged friendships and met up off forum. We have even set up networks in football that are only good for the game. I've also found a link on this site as being extremely useful for practising coaches off forum from beginners to senior NPL coaches.

To annoy the harbingers of doom and gloom, I'm going to start making positive threads about football issues in Feedback in future, rather than whinge.




Edited by Decentric: 23/2/2015 09:50:26 AM

All well and good, but you didn't answer my question.

You can fluff doublespeak around it as much as you want, but pasting an entire article on the forums takes clicks and revenue away from the content creator and helps remove incentive for further compelling football content to be created.

With ads being so pervasive on this site though, it's easy to understand why people are willing to either stay Mum or actively defend the at best unethical, at worst grossly illegal, practice.

Edited by Notorganic: 23/2/2015 09:59:42 AM

I haven't looked into your views too thoroughly before tbh.

One quick thought I had after reading your post is do you think discussion will reduce about certain topics, as some people would be unwilling/motivated to click on the link to the site, and then read the article? I know some threads I go into, I'll just skim or not even read the articles posted and share my views based solely off the title. Would not supplying the article in full perhaps reduce the conversation a bit, hypothetically?

The stand I'm taking, is what is good for football followers on forums.

Not the ethics of articles appearing from other forums. There is a lot of plagiarism involved in academia and journalism, but it is not the role of us, as consumers, to dialectically debate the the moral issues of using other sources for content to discuss football, if we enjoy other facets of the same organisation .

I think you should take a principled stand, based on your beliefs, and leave the forum, if you are so concerned about ethical issues of where the content comes from on 442. I 'm not sure of the views you generally promulgate, although you seem to spend a lot of time arguing with a number of other posters in this thread, over a number of issues that don't concern me

Most stakeholders in media, in a ruthless industry, will access material until the threat of legal action from a rival organisation occurs.





Edited by Decentric: 23/2/2015 10:20:53 AM

The best balance for the right of the author to receive a far opportunity of earning compensation for their work and stimulating discussion here would be to paste a paragraph and encourage people to click on the list and read more.


The journalism trade has already been decimated with a loss of revenue, if you think that denying revenue to content creators is "good for football followers" on forums or anywhere then you're very naive.

I do take a principled stand, when I post articles from websites that deserve clickthrough traffic I will post an except and encourage others to clickthrough to read the rest. I won't be leaving, sorry.

I think that is a good point, PV4.

Many of us skim over whole articles, without commenting.

The entire article is useful.

I guess if I stopped getting paid on weekends I would just keep driving drunk people around for free. I really love driving, and people love to be driven... they just don't want to pay for it.

I think Joffa means well ultimately, and its hard to Police everything. Is he paid for the role?

All mods get given the password to the Prefects bathroom.

You tell me, deepthroat.

Good to see this posted.

I'm uncomfortable with any member of 442 being discussed in this section in a derogatory way.

The idea a poster advances is far more productive.







Edited by Decentric: 23/2/2015 10:50:04 AM

I'm with D here.
The Joffa hatred is starting to get very, very tiring.

It's not hatred, it's legitimate concern at the damage Joffa is doing to people who write about football as their day job.

Criticism =/= derogatory harassment

To be fair, that line seems to get continually crossed.

True, but this is the matter we are talking about and D is trying to defend.

I've briefly worked in the football media.

I've also had a lot of contact with the media in a previous job in politics.

The media has distorted so much and can be so cynical, devious, even despicable, in getting an angle on a story. At the same time they can be very constructive.

I have never known an industry with so many egotists. Conversely, the world of welfare/ social work has a fantastic bunch of altruists. The industries of education and building are also vastly better than the media too.

To denigrate what Joffa/Joffabot based on ethics is flawed, given they are extrapolating articles from a ruthless industry, where I imagine various journos are ripping each other off and doing each over searching for stories to gain an edge.

Sorry to do this lads, but Mike Cockerill, Sebastian Hassett and Michael Lynch, know little about pro football, because they have never played professionally or coached at at high level, with little coach education. Yet they are confident enough to gratuitously enunciate their opinions on TV, even about performance, which they know little about.

I'd have no hesitation, these guys are competing with each other, and a lot of others, over stories in the media as who gets exclusives.

That anyone cuts and pastes journos' articles, who sometimes misrepresent players and coaches, is no concern to me.






Edited by Decentric: 23/2/2015 12:19:44 PM

Oh right, it's ok to steal from those guys because they don't put a 1 in the formation to count the keeper.

I'd also defend any other poster singled out for constant excoriation from a few posters looking for the negative rather than positive, unless they are frequent trollers .

If they constantly transgress, they're frequently banned.

Another thread that Joffa has set up, which I really like and he has put lot of work into, is the sticky on HAL crowds.=d>

Notorganic, why don't you who display some proactivity and start some threads yourself? The same applies to some of the other strident Joffa critics.




Edited by Decentric: 23/2/2015 12:35:20 PM

This is a constant allusion by recently trained coach educators off forum these days.

It has nothing to do with castigating those that don't do it on 442, but modern football recognises the contemporary role of the keeper as being different from those of the past.

Like some others on here, it is your right to mock it, and look for the negative.](*,)

Fair point, the fact that line is being crossed is the only reason I can see for people defending Joffa though tbh.

I'm not a fan of attacking the man like many are, but when pretty much everyone is pissed off with the way he conducts himself I think his defenders need to stop staunchly defending the man and acknowledge what the rest of us are seeing from his posting.

You're defending a content thief and advocating for content theft in turn . Each to their own, but I'll continue to speak out against it and demonstrate best practice when I post articles myself.

Not that continuing talking about it is exactly re-railing the thread, but I must admit I subscribe to a lot of ideals etc with modern football but the two that I just can't subscribe to are:
- goalkeepers included in formations
- this trend of not putting players (or only a player on the near post) on goalposts for corners and similar-positioned freekicks.

Looks at the context of what he is saying.

He doesn't respect the work of certain journalists because he doesn't perceive them as having the same knowledge of the game as he perceives himself to have and therefore it's ok to steal their work for the financial benefit of another company.

I've always considered myself to be a Joffa defender, or at the very least a non-understander of the hate, but I've never bothered to look at the situation specifically like notor has done well to detail in here.

So what do people want to see from Joffa? If he makes the same amount of threads, and links to the same amount of articles, but only uses headlines and possibly one paragraph from said article - will people be happy and leave him alone, so to speak? Or is the ingrained perception of Joffa, coupled with the fact that the news-generating bot is a hilarious (imo) tribute to Joffa in Joffabot, still push people over the line?

The first point is that I've constantly attended KNVB/FFA courses where the 1 is in front of the formation to recognise the role of the keeper as a sweeper. It is something I've inadvertently assimilated from these courses. I see by doing it, it can provide an educative role, if one looks at the difference between Ryan and Schwarzer.

We can agree to disagree.


The second point is that some sort of data shows that putting players on each post supposedly has more probability of saving goals scored from corners than not doing it. Yet I concur with you. I feel it is a necessity to put a player on each post at corners.




Edited by Decentric: 23/2/2015 12:52:08 PM

Yeah but formation listings are about positioning not individual player roles. In a 442 there is no differentiation between individual roles of the outfield players so why make a point of doing it for the keeper when his position is default, it just looks incredibly wanky and unnecessary.

A bit of editorial self restraint wouldn't go astray, either.

The constant shitpost and showerthought polls that seem to recycle monthly are especially grating considering that the ability for everyone to make polls was taken away due to the exact same behaviour that he continues from us great unwashed.

Whether or not we should put a "1" for the keeper.

The big issues.

On content theft, I would be happy to look at every website that Joffa scrapes a new article from and scrape the copyright disclaimer into the same thread.

Now we just need a discussion on Langerak > Jedinak as well as a reference to the FFT Tri-Leagues (Belgium, Bulli 2 and Holland) and the circle of FFT life will have been complete.

I didn't say that.

I proffered that it may not be wise to extol the virtues of some journos/companies, as paragons of virtue, exemplified in News Limited, because some of what they report is distinctly biased and unethical.

I also alluded to the ego that can be prevalent in the media. I can also see an antithetical argument that can be posited to my last sentence.

As a corollary, the means as to which they compile some of their stories, is also distinctly unethical at times. I'm discussing the media generically.

Also, may of us cut and paste some stories, at various times, for the benefit of other posters on 442. I've suggested that it may be pertinent for Joffa/Joffabot to cut and paste a finite number of stories, and for the poll threads to be reduced.

I also maintain Joffa has done some good things for this forum, that may not be known that widely, or publicised.





Edited by Decentric: 23/2/2015 01:03:37 PM

If you are doing this, I maintain you have too much time on your hands.

More football coaches are needed in Australia, particularly at junior level.

Are you interested?

No

Take it up with the FFA Technical Department.

Also, the Dutch KNVB and probably the French, German and Spanish national football federations.

It would also seem arrogant or ignorant in Australia, if top European nations' football terminology was ignored by us, when we are borrowing from them in methodology.

We are a football minnow in global terms.

Then again, we have plenty of people involved in football clubs in Australia who think we should ignore world's best practice. Instead, according to them, we should formulate our own eclectic methodology ( based on goodness knows what) with the highlight being failure to qualify for a World Cup in 32 years.](*,) ,







Edited by Decentric: 23/2/2015 04:21:45 PM

A lot of clubs need raffle coordinators, referees, canteen operators and administrators too.

I can vouch for your literacy skills in compiling flyers and newsletters.:lol:










Edited by Decentric: 23/2/2015 01:11:13 PM

lol, but the FFT tri-leagues are actually a genuine issue.

They've done a lot in restoring and developing our current squad.

Perhaps Joffa could join a club and steal another clubs newsletter

I could do with a bloke like you with a lot of time on his hands.


For:

*Pumping up balls.

*Putting cones out for grids.

*Sending out emails.

*Carrying poles and putting them out in grids.

*Washing vests.

*Washing the shirts on a weekly basis.


Are you interested?:lol:

lol.

I imagine nothing would turn me off football faster than working with Decentric

There I was thinking I might see you build up some core body strength, instead of muscular fingers developed from being an intrepid keyboard warrior escapades in cyberworld.:)

It could occur from carrying big bags of footballs, pumping them up with a hand pump, sprinting to put cones out, putting poles in place, ironing vests and team shirts, running the canteen, pouring thirsty blokes like me beer in the club bar, organising raffles, working the gates on match days, staffing the barbecue, cleaning the club toilets, etc.:lol:

You might have a lot more on your mind other than giving Joffa a hard time.:lol:





Edited by Decentric: 23/2/2015 04:15:51 PM

Stop derailing, this thread is about Joffa, not about you trying to lure men into your den to handle your balls.

Well that's just the natural conclusion everyone came to as well.

Oh geez :lol:

-PB

This isn't about theft, this is about looking for a reason to bash him :lol:

The whole world of journalism has evolved to where the industry does not exist as it has previously.

So what you are saying is that some posters, like you, Notorganic, can cut and paste from some websites that you deem acceptable for article extrapolation, whilst others can not, like Joffa?

Care to elucidate the manifest casuistry in your post?

This is the way I see it too.

I wonder if some of the critics would also like Joffa's mod job too.

Draupnir, why don't you rephrase the thread title so this is an issue about cutting and passing generically, rather being about specific poster's cut and pasting behaviour?

I'm assuming that most reading this thread title have cut and pasted football articles at some time to 442. I have, but have not been criticised for doing it.

I've never set up polls, as I am usually not interested. However, that does not mean I question the right of others to do so.


What should be considered a reasonable number of polls made by a poster in a week?

Why?




Should posters cut and paste articles from other sites?

Why or why not?



Are some more equal than others in cutting and pasting?



What is the definition of a plausible cut and paste action?






Edited by Decentric: 23/2/2015 08:19:38 PM

You have to admit, it's a pretty good reason.

Ie: ABC does not rely on site advertising for revenue, so there's no ethical reason to not cut & paste the whole article as long as it is correctly attributed, alongside other articles that are posted under CreativeCommons licencing arrangements.

It's a good reason... but don't you download and stream movies and TV shops? ;)

I don't, but even if I did they would be different situations.

If Joffa were downloading articles to his PC rather than taking them from one publicly available area and replicating them to another publicly available area then you may have a point ;)

That's because he has over moderated in the past for shithouse reasons, hence people will find shithouse reasons to rag on him.

Cycle of life.

-PB

Y'all just need more peace pipe up in yo lives.

So wonderful to see such principled people on here.

I take it everyone will be uninstalling adblock then lest they deprive anyone of ad revenue.

I think this is a fertile recruiting ground for football clubs to recruit some bored cybergeeks and loafers to get off their bottoms and clean some club toilets, as well as pour some diligent workers in football, like me, some quality beer at the clubrooms.:lol:


In the Australian section this morning, there are heaps of articles cut and pasted by a plethora of 442 members. None have been rebuked by the naysayers in this thread. :roll:

Why not?

Because you shamed me into accepting Joffa's unethical behaviour, it wouldn't be fair to come down on other people.

It has been okay for Arthur, Damo Baresi, Switters, Scott 21, City Slicker, and me, plus a plethora of other posters, to cut and paste articles on 442, but apparently Joffa is not permitted?:roll:

I am taking an unequivocal stand. This is because a diversity of forum members cut and paste articles from other sites, 442 has a lot of football content to view, then respond to, not manifest anywhere else.

If one adds the 442 articles, this provides constant, new football content for members to respond to. This elicits football discussion.

Moreover, the 442 scenario moves inexorably forwards and keeps posters like you, Notorganic, coming back for more. It might be nice for you to acknowledge the unmitigated success of the 442 football forum, and your unequivocal support of it, by contributing often and regularly.:lol:

In terms of ethics, I can see a some cogency in your argument that the ABC, ostensibly a non-profit organisation, should be treated differently from profit making media organisations.

Congratulations on taking a stand...

Joffa means well, and he wants what's best for this site.

+1 to decentric

There you go, Decrepit, you have the venerable Gladbach on your side so you clearly have the superior argument.

I shall refrain from highlighting Joffa's ethically-challenged actions in the future.

No wonder Jedinak isn't playing anymore, he's performances weren't even better than an A-League player in Milligan at the Asian Cup.

Waiting for Draupnir who scored stats to save the day from Europe's best DM.

This is the right thread right what's going on

I cut and paste numerous articles but im sort of with Draupy on this one (so im a naysayer) and I do think that Joffa is a good mod but the moderating team maybe needs a bit more consistency in terms of what's locked and what isn't (not just a Joffa problem)- possibly through more communication in the mod thread?

Whilst I agree that the WSW thread was getting a bit iffy in regards to what was actually being posted surely the offending posts could have been deleted and a warning issues in the thread to stay away from that stuff, after all it was a light hearted thread 95% of the time and all of its discussion has just spewed out into de-railing some other threads anyway.

Edited by jlm8695: 24/2/2015 01:46:06 PM

Needs to be more editing of posts rather than just closing down whole threads.

Or phantom deletions.

-PB

Phantom deletions scare me.

For the most part from what I see (and do), closing of threads are usually thoroughly explained and are usually done because the threads seems non-re-railable (lol), or that the thread would serve no longer purpose in being open or it's just that bad that it needs to be cut. Usually it's pretty clear which rules are being violated, and they are explained.

Phantom deletions are sometimes necessary. I admit to doing these at times, but usually I'll go to the lengths of explaining why (aka taking away the phantom). Most of the time it is when a post that requires deletion due to the hectic nature of it or something like that, and multiple people have quoted it. I had a bit of a frenzy of phantom deletions last night in the Politics thread, but that's because I was literally cleaning up the troll bait.

u4486662 in, Joffa out

Here's a good example on how to do it effectively, Decrepit.

http://au.fourfourtwo.com/forums/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2170474#2170474



A small except and gist of the article, a link to the full article and a small personal analysis and opinion to stimulate discussion.

Everyone wins in this situation;
Forumites wishing to discuss the abstract only and engage with the analysis without clicking can do just that.
Forumites wishing to get the full story of the article can click and read the entire article on the website of origin, thus providing opportunity for the author to be compensated for his/her work.
Page clutter is reduced.

I think you are being overly pedantic. It is only my opinion, but I surmise the pedantry occurs because you have more insight into the industry than most, possibly with a vested interest.

Nevertheless, I acknowledge you are discussing the issue per se, rather than personalising it by attacking one poster for doing what most do - cutting and pasting football articles on 442.

I surmise you are a trained journo who is underemployed, unemployed, or a journo student. I have offspring in the same predicament.

With the change from print to internet a metamorphosis has occurred in the industry. There are less jobs in the media industry and a lot of tertiary trained journos exist, with my offspring having to pursue further post graduate training to procure a profession.



My bias against the industry exists, because I've been interviewed in political settings for media purposes. I've often been disgusted with the methods the media use , their manipulation, disingenuousness, egotism, cynicism, arrogance, selfishness, to compile stories. Even worse, what has appeared in print, or TV, has been a distortion of what I, or others, said or written, by omitting key content.

A mate of mine has been a prominent football journo. In work for a Murdoch tabloid, he has been given a hard time about reporting genuine football stories, particularly about Australian football. They want a lot more European football content.

Yet as soon as there is a bad news story about football - crowd violence, cancellation of games through player violence, etc, the Murdoch tabloid gives carte blanche for journos to gather dirt and it gets maximum exposure and column space.

Even worse, I've had editors and sport editors blatantly lie to me, that they have had no further concerns expressed to them about football issues I've raised, or write to them, with their abysmal coverage of football. I've had mates show me what they've written to the same tabloid, expressing similar views. ](*,)

However, in a different setting, music, I've written articles that have been printed word for word.=d>

In the occasional political settings, the media have accurately reported events too, namely the ABC.


So to hear you preach a sanctimonious perspective, abut the most cynical industry I've known in a work career spanning 40 years, when the same industry is often so despicably underhand and egocentric, does not sit well with me.[-x


Industries like building, education, welfare, music, agriculture and football, even politics, that I've worked in, have many far more altruistic and decentric (the opposite to egocentric) people committed to the benefit of other people, than the media.[-x


What I like about the intent of perspective though, is your idealism, based on normative principles. There is a great deal of social justice apparent. I highly value it and laud you for it.=d>

If you were applying this to other issues and industries, I'd acquiesce.:)







Edited by Decentric: 25/2/2015 09:16:49 AM

How to argue Notorganic style.

1) Take the moral high ground.


2) Get shown to be a hypocrite. (Spruik about adblock in dozens of posts....


.....and then crap on about ad revenue being lost and journalists being dudded. See this thread.)

3) Post the 1 in 1000 contrary example from some dark corner of the internet to show the current proposition proffered to be false. (Pick any argument about women getting the rough end of the pineapple for an example here. Plenty of those in ET.)

4) Build a strawman by answering a question with a question. (Ask Rusty about this - see politics thread for dozens of examples.)

5) Belittle an opponent by implying he's a pa_edophile or a homosexual (With reference to Decentric)


and/or by having a crack about his age.


6) Alternatively belittle an opponent by name-calling.


7) Sarcastically agree with your opponent.


8) Claim that whilst everyone else is guilty of the above he never is.

9) Always get the last word in. Post, post and post again until your opponent gives up replying. Then claim you've won and/or they've "died of embarassment".

There's probably more but unlike this time-wasting oxygen thief I have a job that doesn't involve spending vast swathes of my time on an internet forum for small children with small minds.

So flame away internet warrior. I'll take it all with a grain of salt as I've just learnt from a very illuminating post the other night before it was pulled down that far from being the intellectual giant you pretend be you spent years and years working as a telemarketer of all things.

Would be funny if it wasn't so fucking pathetic.




Edited by MUNRUBENMUZ: 2/4/2015 03:17:11 PM

Manrub, you seem mad ;)

This post says a lot.

Thanks, Munrubenmuz.:)

It's like a one stop shop of logical fallacies. He did well.

If he would actually like to address the substance of what is being said (as he is wont to never do), I might be a bit more receptive to him.

Didnt you say you were gonna fucking leave. Just leave.

I don't visit ET. So I don't know what occurs there.

I probably discuss what is in there with real people in real life scenarios off forum.

Munrubenmuz has made a lot of good contributions in other football sections of 442. I'd assume most of us enjoy what he has had to say in the sections I frequent.

I'd like to see him stay on 442.:)

He's made 3 posts since December, all in reference to his irrational dislike of me.

Would just like to congratulate Joffa on having the honour of having started 14 of the current 30 threads on the first page of Australian Football.

#qualitynotquantity

To return to the thread title, which I think should be renamed the ethics of cutting and pasting , there are some other issues.

On many other sites, there is no opportunity for viewers reading the content, to participate on a forum. At best one might be able to respond to a blog, like The Roar. The blog is often administered by the writer of the article.

Sometimes when I've posted what I think is constructive criticism of authors, Mike Tuckerman, Mike Cockerill, et al, it has not been sanctioned by whoever administers the blog. Some people don't like to face harsh truths questioning levels of expertise to pontificate in some areas.

On the other hand, on 442, a poster can have the satisfaction of an immediate comment appearing. So football articles, cut and pasted, which can often manifest with perspectives that one doesn't think about, can provide excellent stimulus for discussion on a forum like 442.

A number of journalists, who would like more response to their work, post on 442 trying to solicit readers to their article on another site. I think they probably need to post more regularly on other issues to gain a level of camaraderie from other 442 posters. To Jesse Fink's credit he used to post on 442. Fair play to him.

Also, I've seen Aidan Ormond respond to other articles that are not his own. Fair play to him.

I'm sure authors of articles would gain a level of satisfaction seeing constructive discussion about topics they've elucidated in articles posted on other sites where there is no mechanism for discussion .

I've just cut and pasted one about NNSW football from Mike Cockerill writing for Fairfax. He eloquently shed light on issues I had no knowledge about previously. As more people become aware of the predicament in NNSW one hopes it leads to a more favourable outcome for their football milieu.








Edited by Decentric: 3/3/2015 08:19:11 AM

#cutfordraupnir