After reading Roly Poly negative posts today,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, I question the freedom of speech on OG
Sure baba, red wumber et al are sailing close to the wind, but if we are a democracy on this forum, then, these posters deserve a voice. However annoying?
Mod's seem to wipe out threads without reason on here
Bans. A mod prerogative? (OK Chippy ??? )
-
Top Londoner
- Posts: 4992
- Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 7:35 pm
- Location: Taser the cuunt
Bans. A mod prerogative? (OK Chippy ??? )
Last edited by Top Londoner on Fri Oct 19, 2012 10:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Bans. A mod perogative?
We're not a democracy on here.
The forum is owned by one man.
What he says goes. The place is governed to his rule. Not me griping, its how it should be.
To be truly independent you'd have to set up your own mag, your own forum.
The forum is owned by one man.
What he says goes. The place is governed to his rule. Not me griping, its how it should be.
To be truly independent you'd have to set up your own mag, your own forum.
-
officepest
- Posts: 5072
- Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 12:27 am
- Location: Lacking a little bit of sharpness in the final third.
Re: Bans. A mod perogative?
Baba made some decent points initially but was all too quick to resort to insults. It became tiresome when every single post could have been copy-and-pasted as it was the same hatchet job repeated ad nauseum, same with US Martin.
Red Member was daft but I'm not sure he/she deserved the hook.
Red Member was daft but I'm not sure he/she deserved the hook.
Re: Bans. A mod perogative?
Who ever said it was a democracy 
Sure I suppose if people are not happy they could ask for their money back
Sure I suppose if people are not happy they could ask for their money back
-
officepest
- Posts: 5072
- Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 12:27 am
- Location: Lacking a little bit of sharpness in the final third.
Re: Bans. A mod perogative?
Surely it's a despotic clique, not a democracy?
-
QuartzGooner
- Posts: 14474
- Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 12:49 pm
- Location: London
Re: Bans. A mod perogative?
Mods simply act under the instruction of the owner.
We do this without payment.
It used to be more lenient here, but the owner took the Forum offline for a month this year, because he was unhappy with the abuse on here.
In the main Red Member and Babatunde were not banned because so much because of what they said about the club, it was how they said it and in what context.
Genuine posters on here post to put across their views.
From time to time that results in a bust up.
But the key thing is that they are not posting to wind other people up; the bust ups are an occasional side effect of their views.
Internet Trolls on the other hand, post to incite discord and to get extreme reactions.
It is my understanding that when the Forum re-opened it was decided one of the faults had been multiple threads on the same subject, so threads of that nature are now usually merged with each other.
We also have to be careful with racism etc because in an age where someone can be jailed for one Tweet, it is not too far a stretch to imagine legal action against the Forum and Magazine for just one contentious post if someone really had an axe to grind
This bit is my personal opinion, but free speech is not a sacred cow.
If you go up to someone in real life and call then a proverbial, chances are they will hit you.
This is abused online where people hide behind usernames.
Someone has to exercise common sense and a modicum of decency otherwise it becomes anarchy and threads descend into nonsense.
We do this without payment.
It used to be more lenient here, but the owner took the Forum offline for a month this year, because he was unhappy with the abuse on here.
In the main Red Member and Babatunde were not banned because so much because of what they said about the club, it was how they said it and in what context.
Genuine posters on here post to put across their views.
From time to time that results in a bust up.
But the key thing is that they are not posting to wind other people up; the bust ups are an occasional side effect of their views.
Internet Trolls on the other hand, post to incite discord and to get extreme reactions.
It is my understanding that when the Forum re-opened it was decided one of the faults had been multiple threads on the same subject, so threads of that nature are now usually merged with each other.
We also have to be careful with racism etc because in an age where someone can be jailed for one Tweet, it is not too far a stretch to imagine legal action against the Forum and Magazine for just one contentious post if someone really had an axe to grind
This bit is my personal opinion, but free speech is not a sacred cow.
If you go up to someone in real life and call then a proverbial, chances are they will hit you.
This is abused online where people hide behind usernames.
Someone has to exercise common sense and a modicum of decency otherwise it becomes anarchy and threads descend into nonsense.
-
Top Gun 49
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 3:43 pm
Re: Bans. A mod perogative?
Hello Red Member here 
I set up another username last week after getting banned and after this post I am sure I will be banned again on this username.
I just wanted to set the record straight because I think things are getting out of hand over these bans on here.
First of all most of what I posted on here was not meant to wind people up - I also post on AFC forum and no one has called me a WUM on there yet.
when I first posted on here last autumn I was considered a WUM because I came out with outrageous comments such as Arsenal will reach the top 4 and how important it was we beat Udinese. I still believe in the latter and funnily enough we did make the top 4. from then on though everyone assumed I was just being stupid. maybe sometimes I did play up a bit - but everyone does on here to an extent
that wasn't the reason I was banned though.
what the MODS did not like and therefore assumed that I was not genuine was because my views changed this summer.
when RVP was sold there was no way Arsenal policy could be defended. Any defence of the club would be in my opinion a wind up. The irony here is that because I became more negative this was considered the wind up!!
I was banned after the City game when my comments apparently annoyed people because I was effectively saying don't get carried away it is only a draw!!
anyway there you go. I apologise if I caused any offence during my time on here.
we are all at the end of the day Arsenal supporters. if I can't post on here I guess I will just have to find somewhere else to post. But at the end of the day I will still support the Arsenal
I set up another username last week after getting banned and after this post I am sure I will be banned again on this username.
I just wanted to set the record straight because I think things are getting out of hand over these bans on here.
First of all most of what I posted on here was not meant to wind people up - I also post on AFC forum and no one has called me a WUM on there yet.
when I first posted on here last autumn I was considered a WUM because I came out with outrageous comments such as Arsenal will reach the top 4 and how important it was we beat Udinese. I still believe in the latter and funnily enough we did make the top 4. from then on though everyone assumed I was just being stupid. maybe sometimes I did play up a bit - but everyone does on here to an extent
that wasn't the reason I was banned though.
what the MODS did not like and therefore assumed that I was not genuine was because my views changed this summer.
when RVP was sold there was no way Arsenal policy could be defended. Any defence of the club would be in my opinion a wind up. The irony here is that because I became more negative this was considered the wind up!!
I was banned after the City game when my comments apparently annoyed people because I was effectively saying don't get carried away it is only a draw!!
anyway there you go. I apologise if I caused any offence during my time on here.
we are all at the end of the day Arsenal supporters. if I can't post on here I guess I will just have to find somewhere else to post. But at the end of the day I will still support the Arsenal
-
arseofacrow
- Posts: 6173
- Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:06 pm
- Location: Cologne
Re: Bans. A mod perogative?
Well said mateNumber 5 wrote:We're not a democracy on here.
The forum is owned by one man.
What he says goes. The place is governed to his rule. Not me griping, its how it should be.
To be truly independent you'd have to set up your own mag, your own forum.
Every fucker wants this place to be all things to everyone. Go and support fucking Greenpeace.
-
Barriecuda
- Posts: 2651
- Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 1:39 am
- Location: Canada
- Contact:
Re: Bans. A mod perogative?
Mods are just volunteers trying to establish a standardized set of rules that guide the board's members. The goal is always to maximizing the members of G2G's enjoyment whilst minimizing the site's potential to be responsible for inappropriate content or libelous material.
The mods are constantly engaged in discussion about where and when to draw lines; that ongoing dialogue is best contributed by mailing members of the 'staff', and probably not by publicly questioning the board's direction. (lol oh the irony).
Speaking personally, I believe the rules are very lax here; unfortunately people like to constantly test the boundaries. As someone mentioned already, you can't be all things to all people - the site (and its mod team) do the best job they can to cater to as many people as possible.
The mods are constantly engaged in discussion about where and when to draw lines; that ongoing dialogue is best contributed by mailing members of the 'staff', and probably not by publicly questioning the board's direction. (lol oh the irony).
Speaking personally, I believe the rules are very lax here; unfortunately people like to constantly test the boundaries. As someone mentioned already, you can't be all things to all people - the site (and its mod team) do the best job they can to cater to as many people as possible.
Re: Bans. A mod perogative?
Top Londoner wrote:After reading Roly Poly negative posts today,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, I question the freedom of speech on OG
Sure baba, red wumber et al are sailing close to the wind, but if we are a democracy on this forum, then, these posters deserve a voice. However annoying?
Mod's seem to wipe out threads without reason on here
threads are never wiped out without reason as you put it nor or people banned because we dont like them, there is a lot of chat among the mods before anything gets done and people get plenty of chances before we take the decision to ban someone, free speech im all for, wumming and trolling on this site im not,
ive been on this site a long time and will say it has changed and maybe not all for the better but we have also lost a lot of good posters because of the constant abuse on a thread which is something that cant and wont be left continue,
last point
we feel we have a good forum here and we want to keep it so the choice for people is simple, if you dont like what i do since i was the one who banned him,or feel some of us abuse our so called power then pm the owner , if he ever felt i went too far then i would have no problem standing down.
-
Henry Norris 1913
- Posts: 8374
- Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 5:25 pm
Re: Bans. A mod perogative?
the more of these stupid *word censored* coming on here with their stupid agendas the less of a voice the sane posters have on here, and the more chance they'll fuck off to somewhere where acting like a *word censored* gets you banned.
Re: Bans. A mod perogative?
Different brushes different strokes for me as in people will always have contrasting views and opinions but I do feel that sometimes people have issue's with authority and as a result question decisions made by mods. That is not to say that I agree with everything on here and I have serious issue's with the clampdown on calling wenger a c**t but house rules dictate and should dictate how people behave on here. People should remember how close this place was to be permanently closed down last year and the (over the top rules) that were put in place when it re-opened, and should be more willing to accept the compromise and relaxing of those rules since.
I have posted my opinions on baba and redmember already but I also think that sid is a different case entirely - I agree that what sid has said was worse than either of the other two have said but there is a world of difference between a guy lashing out as a result of frustration and anger as opposed to the constant but more subtle comments of others. Red has suggested that people just didnt like what he said but the fact is that over the summer his comments went from one extreme to the other and nobody, in my opinion, can do a complete 360 like that. Last season his comments were (imo) designed to wind up the "realists" like myself but this season his remarks seemed to be made to wind up bdb, rigsby etc and for me the only natural conclusion is that he was constantly on the wind up. I personally look forward to the return of sid and lament the loss of or reduction of the quality posters that no longer or rarely frequent here anymore
There has to be standards and rules though
I have posted my opinions on baba and redmember already but I also think that sid is a different case entirely - I agree that what sid has said was worse than either of the other two have said but there is a world of difference between a guy lashing out as a result of frustration and anger as opposed to the constant but more subtle comments of others. Red has suggested that people just didnt like what he said but the fact is that over the summer his comments went from one extreme to the other and nobody, in my opinion, can do a complete 360 like that. Last season his comments were (imo) designed to wind up the "realists" like myself but this season his remarks seemed to be made to wind up bdb, rigsby etc and for me the only natural conclusion is that he was constantly on the wind up. I personally look forward to the return of sid and lament the loss of or reduction of the quality posters that no longer or rarely frequent here anymore
There has to be standards and rules though-
DB10GOONER
- Posts: 62076
- Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 2:06 pm
- Location: Dublin, Ireland.
- Contact:
Re: Bans. A mod perogative?
Fully agree with what my fellow mods have said. We do NOT wipe out or delete posts on a whim, or ban people for no reason. That is just bullshit.
The number of people banned from here is minute compared to other forums. We ban people as a last resort after many warnings.
We DO NOT tolerate trolling or WUMing. Deal with it.
Baba and Wumber were banned because they were having an overly negative impact on other forum members' enjoyment of the forum. When a large number of members are complaining and blocking someone it is for good reason. Why should one or two people be allowed to ruin something for the majority? Just to pay lip service to freedom of speech? Bollocks. Freedom of Speech is not an acceptable excuse to act the Kúnt and it also comes with a responsibility not to abuse it.
This forum is owned by Mike. Mike sets the rules. We (non-paid, voluntary, let's not forget) mods have to make judgement calls within those rules. And we often discuss a course of action before it is taken. Mike very clearly has stated he does not want abuse, trolling or WUMing allowed on here. So that is that. There are many other Arsenal forums out there, and I suggest anyone that has a real problem with the way we mod this one should go try a few of them out and see if they prefer them. No one is forcing anyone to be here.
As said, we can't keep everyone happy all the time. When I banned MadMarty it was after hundreds of calls from regulars that he be banned. As soon as I banned him there were other regulars whining about it being OTT to ban him!
Go figure.
The number of people banned from here is minute compared to other forums. We ban people as a last resort after many warnings.
We DO NOT tolerate trolling or WUMing. Deal with it.
Baba and Wumber were banned because they were having an overly negative impact on other forum members' enjoyment of the forum. When a large number of members are complaining and blocking someone it is for good reason. Why should one or two people be allowed to ruin something for the majority? Just to pay lip service to freedom of speech? Bollocks. Freedom of Speech is not an acceptable excuse to act the Kúnt and it also comes with a responsibility not to abuse it.
This forum is owned by Mike. Mike sets the rules. We (non-paid, voluntary, let's not forget) mods have to make judgement calls within those rules. And we often discuss a course of action before it is taken. Mike very clearly has stated he does not want abuse, trolling or WUMing allowed on here. So that is that. There are many other Arsenal forums out there, and I suggest anyone that has a real problem with the way we mod this one should go try a few of them out and see if they prefer them. No one is forcing anyone to be here.
As said, we can't keep everyone happy all the time. When I banned MadMarty it was after hundreds of calls from regulars that he be banned. As soon as I banned him there were other regulars whining about it being OTT to ban him!
Go figure.
Re: Bans. A mod perogative?
I guess we've all got our own views on what's acceptable and what's funny, but as the MODs have said ultimately it comes down to what Mike deems to be acceptable.
Personally, I don't think there's anything much worse than coming out with bullshit comments about wishing that one of your own players had both of his legs broken. If anyone thinks that's more acceptable than some of the silly comments made by Red or some of the arguments made by Baba, then I don't understand that point of view at all.
We are all supporters of Arsenal - not supporters of sid, or Red Member, or Baba - so for me the lowest form of abuse is that sort of crap comment about Ramsey. How did all genuine Arsenal fans feel that evening at Stoke watching the lad laying there with his leg dangling off whilst abused by the local neanderthals, and then defended afterwards by that shitebag Pulis? I know how I felt - just ever so slightly more pissed off than I did when Red wanted Almunia brought back in to the team, or Baba called someone 'Arsene's little helper'
We all like different players, but when serious injury is wished upon one of our own, who happens to try his heart out every game (not always to great effect admittedly) then that is simply bollocks and if that's not trolling then I don't know what is
Anyway.....happy Friday !
Personally, I don't think there's anything much worse than coming out with bullshit comments about wishing that one of your own players had both of his legs broken. If anyone thinks that's more acceptable than some of the silly comments made by Red or some of the arguments made by Baba, then I don't understand that point of view at all.
We are all supporters of Arsenal - not supporters of sid, or Red Member, or Baba - so for me the lowest form of abuse is that sort of crap comment about Ramsey. How did all genuine Arsenal fans feel that evening at Stoke watching the lad laying there with his leg dangling off whilst abused by the local neanderthals, and then defended afterwards by that shitebag Pulis? I know how I felt - just ever so slightly more pissed off than I did when Red wanted Almunia brought back in to the team, or Baba called someone 'Arsene's little helper'
We all like different players, but when serious injury is wished upon one of our own, who happens to try his heart out every game (not always to great effect admittedly) then that is simply bollocks and if that's not trolling then I don't know what is
Anyway.....happy Friday !
-
DB10GOONER
- Posts: 62076
- Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 2:06 pm
- Location: Dublin, Ireland.
- Contact:
Re: Bans. A mod perogative?
I'll be honest, you don't know what trolling is. A throw away comment made whilst angry (no matter how offensive) is NOT trolling. It is an offensive comment. Sid was banned for it for 7 days and that was fitting for one offensive comment.SteveO 35 wrote:I guess we've all got our own views on what's acceptable and what's funny, but as the MODs have said ultimately it comes down to what Mike deems to be acceptable.
Personally, I don't think there's anything much worse than coming out with bullshit comments about wishing that one of your own players had both of his legs broken. If anyone thinks that's more acceptable than some of the silly comments made by Red or some of the arguments made by Baba, then I don't understand that point of view at all.
We are all supporters of Arsenal - not supporters of sid, or Red Member, or Baba - so for me the lowest form of abuse is that sort of crap comment about Ramsey. How did all genuine Arsenal fans feel that evening at Stoke watching the lad laying there with his leg dangling off whilst abused by the local neanderthals, and then defended afterwards by that shitebag Pulis? I know how I felt - just ever so slightly more pissed off than I did when Red wanted Almunia brought back in to the team, or Baba called someone 'Arsene's little helper'
We all like different players, but when serious injury is wished upon one of our own, who happens to try his heart out every game (not always to great effect admittedly) then that is simply bollocks and if that's not trolling then I don't know what is
Anyway.....happy Friday !
Trolling is spending a long period of time posting often non-sensical, or provocative, or abusive stuff purely to sidetrack threads, or provoke overly negative responses or to wind people up. Baba and Wumber were NOT banned for one or two comments or for their opinions. They were EVENTUALLY banned for their conduct over a long period of time. And after both had been warned and asked to modify their behaviour on several occasions.
