Notices
Reply to Thread
Page 40 of 42 FirstFirst ... 303839404142 LastLast
Results 1,171 to 1,200 of 1252

Thread: **Query Your Infractions in Here. Polite Requests Only Please.

  1. #1171  
    GrottonRed is online now LFC Forums Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    24,498
    Quote Originally Posted by RedBaros View Post
    Oh that, ok, yes I always call him Phillip because he always irritates me, no matter what the subject. He seems to enjoy going on the attack for any reason so don't have any patience with him.

    Last night was extra special, 3 of them one after the other, so I earned a good 3 points there!

    Cheers Grotton,
    RB
    Np problem....though it will be considerably more than 3 pts if you repeat it.
    Life President of TEPS...The Ellipsis Preservation Society.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  2. #1172  
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    24,615
    Quote Originally Posted by GrottonRed View Post
    Np problem....though it will be considerably more than 3 pts if you repeat it.
    You should supply me with a buffer of bonus points the amount of grief I have to deal with.

    Don't forget my battles are in defence of our owners and manager against extreme obtuseness therefore some leeway is awarded in such cases. Article 12 section 3a, RB bylaws 2009.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  3. #1173  
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    24,615
    Told you I needed a buffer.

    If you're going to infract posts, you should also infract the idiots who cause you to lose the rag through their sheer ignorance. It's the cause of all arguments.

    You don't fix anything by infracting reactions alone.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  4. #1174  
    GrottonRed is online now LFC Forums Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    24,498
    Quote Originally Posted by RedBaros View Post
    Told you I needed a buffer.

    If you're going to infract posts, you should also infract the idiots who cause you to lose the rag through their sheer ignorance. It's the cause of all arguments.

    You don't fix anything by infracting reactions alone.
    Another poster being ignorant, in your opinion, doesn't give you the right to call the poster names.

    If we infracted every poster who appeared to not know what they are talking about...There'd be very few posts or posters left.

    I'd be in trouble too...from time to time.
    Life President of TEPS...The Ellipsis Preservation Society.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  5. #1175  
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    24,615
    And that couldn't have meant their place in football could it? No automatically think the worst never mind what we were talking about.

    Sick and tired of explaining my posts on this forum.

    Men have their place in football, and women have theirs. There shouldn't be any complaints one is paid more than the other, because it's just plain common sense why.

    Never mind, I'm used to it.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  6. #1176  
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    24,615
    Mods need more training on what is bickering. You've just killed off a section of debate between two posters where valuable points were being made discussing the thread.

    There was no name calling, or insults. The point was being made about how one side made no effort debating properly with the other, which now means that the thread will continue the same way, just at the point where just maybe, one of those posters might have taken my words on board and started discussing the point better.

    Never mind, I'm used to it.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  7. #1177  
    Jannno is online now LFC Forums Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    29,197
    Quote Originally Posted by RedBaros View Post
    Mods need more training on what is bickering. You've just killed off a section of debate between two posters where valuable points were being made discussing the thread.

    There was no name calling, or insults. The point was being made about how one side made no effort debating properly with the other, which now means that the thread will continue the same way, just at the point where just maybe, one of those posters might have taken my words on board and started discussing the point better.

    Never mind, I'm used to it.
    Mods don't need training, RB. What we define as unacceptable put downs and bickering includes the way you've lectured mods in the posts above and in your misuse of the report function today. Hopefully now you know what the standards are on here. You might not agree with it but that's how it is. Time to move on.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  8. #1178  
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    24,615
    ..
    Last edited by RedBaros; 12-10-17 at 13:22. Reason: so pointless even trying on here
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  9. #1179  
    LordJamieOfCarragher is online now LFC Forums Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    88,839
    MOD NOTE

    This thread is for querying your infractions, not for asking why someone else hasn't been infracted for whatever reason.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  10. #1180  
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    24,615
    Quote Originally Posted by LordJamieOfCarragher View Post
    MOD NOTE

    This thread is for querying your infractions, not for asking why someone else hasn't been infracted for whatever reason.
    Right so now I'm not allowed to ask how it's ok for someone to insult me but I get infracted for it?

    Because the post in question has magically reappeared fully in tact.

    What's the deal with that??
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  11. #1181  
    Jannno is online now LFC Forums Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    29,197
    Quote Originally Posted by RedBaros View Post
    Right so now I'm not allowed to ask how it's ok for someone to insult me but I get infracted for it?

    Because the post in question has magically reappeared fully in tact.

    What's the deal with that??
    It's never been the case that we discuss other users with anyone. It's a matter of policy. The alternative is that things descend into recriminations and jealousy which takes up time and energy it doesn't warrant. Look after your own posting. If someone is rude to you report it and then don't talk to them and talk to people who are reasonable. More peace and less angst all round. Let this matter drop now please.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  12. #1182  
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    24,615
    Quote Originally Posted by Jannno View Post
    It's never been the case that we discuss other users with anyone. It's a matter of policy. The alternative is that things descend into recriminations and jealousy which takes up time and energy it doesn't warrant. Look after your own posting. If someone is rude to you report it and then don't talk to them and talk to people who are reasonable. More peace and less angst all round. Let this matter drop now please.
    Well, this is the point Jannno, I have reported it, the post was deleted pending further investigation which shows it's offensive to more than just me. The post has now reappeared with the insult still there.

    The mods must have seen this post more than once because the one that was reported just after it was deleted but they ignored the first one.

    Now at the second time of asking, it's still there.

    You can't avoid answering this by telling me I'm not allowed to discuss other posters. I'm not discussing another poster now, I'm asking why it's OK for someone to insult me.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  13. #1183  
    LordJamieOfCarragher is online now LFC Forums Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    88,839
    Quote Originally Posted by RedBaros View Post
    Well, this is the point Jannno, I have reported it, the post was deleted pending further investigation which shows it's offensive to more than just me. The post has now reappeared with the insult still there.
    You reported it twice.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  14. #1184  
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    24,615
    Quote Originally Posted by LordJamieOfCarragher View Post
    You reported it twice.
    And? How many reports does it take to be deleted by posters?

    Why are you being obtuse?
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  15. #1185  
    LordJamieOfCarragher is online now LFC Forums Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    88,839
    Quote Originally Posted by RedBaros View Post
    And? How many reports does it take to be deleted by posters?

    Why are you being obtuse?
    I'm pointing out that the post in question wasn't offensive to more than just you.

    You report a post, once, the Mod team take action if required.

    That's how it works.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  16. #1186  
    LordJamieOfCarragher is online now LFC Forums Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    88,839
    Quote Originally Posted by RedBaros View Post
    It takes three reports to be deleted, LJOC, three, but this is besides the point. I asked for an answer from Jannno not for you to intervene with your ego.


    Mods have ignored one poster insulting another, and I'm still waiting for an answer.
    Ahhh, ego, that old chestnut

    It's two reports actually, but that doesn't suit your argument, does it.

    Last warning, drop this right now.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  17. #1187  
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    28,326
    Now Kickthetyres has rectified the wrong

    Can someone amend my infraction points - coz clearly I was replying not provoking
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  18. #1188  
    GrottonRed is online now LFC Forums Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    24,498
    Quote Originally Posted by Mysteron View Post
    Now Kickthetyres has rectified the wrong

    Can someone amend my infraction points - coz clearly I was replying not provoking
    Your reply was provoking other users.

    2 wrongs don't make a right.
    Life President of TEPS...The Ellipsis Preservation Society.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  19. #1189  
    MacFoley'1975 is online now First team regular
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    39,471
    ...
    Last edited by GrottonRed; 23-10-17 at 10:23. Reason: wrong thread mate...
    The Normal One (Emlyn is in the house) - Est 1975
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  20. #1190  
    canookiewookie is online now Academy prospect
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    10,137
    How is it I am the only one "talked" too, when there are a couple of others who are running their little fingers on the keyboard as well, in this little back and forth tussle? (and one person who decided to comment, when they were not even part of the conversation?) And on top of this, I get some infractions.

    I understand I have a few infractions, but this should make it acceptable for others to run their fingers, while I have to sit back and let it go.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  21. #1191  
    GrottonRed is online now LFC Forums Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    24,498
    Quote Originally Posted by canookiewookie View Post
    How is it I am the only one "talked" too, when there are a couple of others who are running their little fingers on the keyboard as well, in this little back and forth tussle? (and one person who decided to comment, when they were not even part of the conversation?) And on top of this, I get some infractions.

    I understand I have a few infractions, but this should make it acceptable for others to run their fingers, while I have to sit back and let it go.
    It isn't a back and forth tussle though is it?

    You are constantly posting in an antagonistic/confrontational manner...hence your infraction history.
    Life President of TEPS...The Ellipsis Preservation Society.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  22. #1192  
    canookiewookie is online now Academy prospect
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    10,137
    Quote Originally Posted by GrottonRed View Post
    It isn't a back and forth tussle though is it?

    You are constantly posting in an antagonistic/confrontational manner...hence your infraction history.
    Are you saying it was only me writing? Because we know it wasn't. Was it back and forth, it would be hard to say it wasn't since it was myself and another poster exchanging posts.

    On top of that, another poster decided to run his little fingers as well, without being part of the discussion.

    How can you dispute this?
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  23. #1193  
    GrottonRed is online now LFC Forums Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    24,498
    Quote Originally Posted by canookiewookie View Post
    Are you saying it was only me writing? Because we know it wasn't. Was it back and forth, it would be hard to say it wasn't since it was myself and another poster exchanging posts.

    On top of that, another poster decided to run his little fingers as well, without being part of the discussion.

    How can you dispute this?
    You have had your answer why you were infracted...move on now please.

    We'll deal with other matters how we see fit.
    Life President of TEPS...The Ellipsis Preservation Society.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  24. #1194  
    canookiewookie is online now Academy prospect
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    10,137
    ...
    Last edited by GrottonRed; 28-10-17 at 18:42. Reason: not heeding moderation
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  25. #1195  
    MiraclesArePossible is online now Boot Room insider
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    56,238
    I was banned for the period of four days on the basis of "Seeking to provoke other users" and "taking cheap shots at the moderating team". The comment that I made constituted neither.

    Cullenator posted the Women's Football thread in order to discuss the specific fact that FIFA had nominated a relatively unknown Venezuelan footballer, Deyna Castellanos, for the award of best player in the world for this year. Many, including Cullenator, had made the argument that this showed FIFA's lack of interest in the women's game. There was also some good discussion of the Eniola Aluko saga which came to a head at the Select Committee two weeks ago. It should have been a space in which likeminded people could talk about issues in the women's game that interested them.

    What instead happened is exactly what also happened to at least one other thread: this one, which was posted on October 7th. What happened in both cases was that the discussion had been derailed by a number of posters who had come into the thread in order to denigrate the women's game itself. The thread became a dichotomy between those discussing the issue, and those wading in to denigrate the women's game itself, thereby attempting to discredit the need to discuss the issue in the very first place.

    No other topic of discussion on this forum has to justify its right to exist and be discussed on as much as women's football does. Now, two posters who have contributed intelligently to the thread in TheSoundLady and Cullenator have already expressed a desire to no longer use these threads to discuss women's football because of the way the conversation gets reduced to pettiness over whether they should even be discussing it in the first place.

    That explains the report I issued and the comment that I made. Contributions such as that of Scrams' - who consistently maintained that women's football, in his words, wasn't marketable, and FranklyMrShankly, who sidetracked the discussion into a comparison between the merits of women's football as opposed to men's, citing what he terms 'biological facts' - added nothing to the discussion at hand, and as TheSoundLady pointed out, it wasn't an opportunity for people to come into the thread to verbally devalue the game because they simply didn't happen to enjoy watching it. Hence, I reported posts in the thread in order to try to move the discussion back into what it was originally there for.

    Not long after I made that initial report than LordJamieOfCarragher came into the thread and said that he, like Scrams, couldn't name a women's footballer either. My specific point of criticism on that post is that it contributed to the derailing of a discussion and empowered the sort of people who make other posters feel that using these threads for a discussion is not worth their while. To therefore say that I was 'seeking to provoke' is a gross misapprehension of what it was that I was 'seeking' to do. And to call it a cheap shot at a moderator unfairly represents the point that I did make. To ban me for a period of four days for a misconceived view of what my post had actually said was beyond the pale.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  26. #1196  
    kickthetyres is online now LFC Forums Moderator
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    22,753
    GrottenRed isn't around for a few days MAPs. But I've looked at the thread and it seems that the key point of contention is what should and should not be discussed within it; the OP pointed to a headline declaring that FIFA doesn't care about women's football so in my view its understandable that other posters thought it appropriate to cast the same opinion within the thread.
    Internet forums inevitably have topic creep and its a blurry line for a mod to decide when a discussion has strayed from the original point too far, as 3 mods posted in that thread it seems that they didn't. You of course disagree and unfortunately tried to police the thread to keep the discussion within the bounds that you and a few others deemed appropriate. I guess that the statement calling out certain posters and blaming the mods for not acting as you thought appropriate was the clincher that got the infraction - remarks about the mod team and how they do (or don't) carry out their responsibilities are of course expressly prohibited.
    I'd simply say to follow your own suggestion you gave out later in the thread to ignore posters who you believe are trying to derail a thread, a suggestion I note you immediately ignored as you offered a reply to the next user who threw in a one-liner!
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  27. #1197  
    MiraclesArePossible is online now Boot Room insider
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    56,238
    Quote Originally Posted by kickthetyres View Post
    GrottenRed isn't around for a few days MAPs. But I've looked at the thread and it seems that the key point of contention is what should and should not be discussed within it; the OP pointed to a headline declaring that FIFA doesn't care about women's football so in my view its understandable that other posters thought it appropriate to cast the same opinion within the thread.
    Internet forums inevitably have topic creep and its a blurry line for a mod to decide when a discussion has strayed from the original point too far, as 3 mods posted in that thread it seems that they didn't. You of course disagree and unfortunately tried to police the thread to keep the discussion within the bounds that you and a few others deemed appropriate. I guess that the statement calling out certain posters and blaming the mods for not acting as you thought appropriate was the clincher that got the infraction - remarks about the mod team and how they do (or don't) carry out their responsibilities are of course expressly prohibited.
    I'd simply say to follow your own suggestion you gave out later in the thread to ignore posters who you believe are trying to derail a thread, a suggestion I note you immediately ignored as you offered a reply to the next user who threw in a one-liner!
    Thanks for the response.

    I accept there's more I could be doing to help, and yeah you're right I should have taken my own advice! Though what I'm specifically arguing against is the idea that disagreeing with what the moderator did was worthy of the infraction. I'm not trying to police the thread. It's that it's tiring that every time we talk about women's football it gets dragged into that same toing-and-froing about whether we should have the right to talk about it at all. I don't think it's fair that everyone who ever wants to talk about issues in the women's game has to put up with that kind of response from certain posters. To see a moderator then take part in that, as opposed to helping to keep it a decent place to discuss the topic at hand was disappointing.

    Though you can still disagree with my specific comment, without considering it a cheap shot - I didn't insult him in any way - nor was it an attempt to provoke. It was a fairly worded critique of the way the thread had gone. It's possible to disagree with what I said and discuss it without banning me for intending something that I never intended at all.

    I think it's the nature of the beast that if there's to be a space to discuss women's football on the forum, one in which posters like Cullenator and TSL can talk about it at will, there needs to be a bit of clamping down on people like Scrams coming into the thread effectively telling them to shut up about it because it's not worth watching. That's the concern I was raising. It doesn't constitute an insult towards a moderator nor an attempt to provoke anyone.

    In any event I appreciate your response. It's good of you to take the time out to get back to me the way you did.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  28. #1198  
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    27,390
    I've been given 3 points for 'inappropriate content' can someone explain what this is for, please?
    YNWA
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  29. #1199  
    bilsland is online now LFC Forums Moderator
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    29,136
    Quote Originally Posted by Gegenpressing View Post
    I've been given 3 points for 'inappropriate content' can someone explain what this is for, please?
    I could have classed your comment as seeking to provoke, linsulting other poster or inappropriate comment. Any of them would fit the bill.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  30. #1200  
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    27,390
    Quote Originally Posted by bilsland View Post
    I could have classed your comment as seeking to provoke, linsulting other poster or inappropriate comment. Any of them would fit the bill.
    What did I say that was wrong?
    YNWA
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   



Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •