Liverpool FC Forum

by **GYBS** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 12:07 pm

yep - words can be very very harmful when the other person knows they will cause damamge

i am extremly sorry to hear about your child red . you have my deepest sympathies.

by **Bad Bob** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 12:14 pm

bigmick wrote:And meanwhile while we are banning Liverpool fans who don't toe the party line, in the football part of the forum as of now there are a couple of fairly obviously non-Liverpool supporters posting right now. World's gone mad.

This brings up another interesting point, actually. Of all the many PMs/Reports to Mods we receive on a weekly basis asking us to take some sort of action, only the tiniest fraction are about proper WUMs invading the site. We rarely get a heads up that so and so seems a little hinky or there's newbie in the match thread that might be a WUM. Instead, the vast majority of PMs we receive can best be characterized as exercises in axe-grinding between established members. Maybe too many Liverpool fans are more interested in getting the Mods to help them get one over on fellow supporters than they are in ridding the site of unwelcome WUMs?

by **dawson99** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 12:18 pm

but now people like macaroon are getting caught in the crossfire. lets not be too hasty to ban people from posting or whatnot

by **GYBS** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 12:19 pm

i got a feeling they are previously banned memebers returning to the forum daws - the fact macroon was calling someone a muppet within 5 posts of registering just points it that way

by **dawson99** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 12:21 pm

GYBS wrote:i got a feeling they are previously banned memebers returning to the forum daws - the fact macroon was calling someone a muppet within 5 posts of registering just points it that way

proof tho? if not then we are getting bad. need to give benefit before banning, assume makes an :censored:

out of u and me lol

by **bigmick** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 12:21 pm

Bad Bob wrote:
bigmick wrote:In that, Magus said he thought it was unfair that four people got banned for doing what they did. I agree with him.

Here is the fundamental flaw in that statement, mate. You guys only have the bare outlines of what they, or any banned member, actually did to deserve a ban. Suffice to say, we go on much more than just what bubbles up in the thread itself.
That's why these "why was member X banned?" threads are beyond tedious. You get all kinds of people weighing in with their theories and gripes about the ban but it's all based on a fraction of the information.

Now, I won't share all the details because, frankly, this isn't a public inquiry that needs a full airing of every sordid element that leads to a mod's decision. To give you an instance of what I mean, though, take Supplemonkey--one of the four poor souls who got banned the other day. It was just an innocuous comment that went against the grain right? Not really. His banning probably had a lot more to do with the fact that he was almost certainly an alter ego of an already banned member who sent Red another despicable PM about something very private and personal.

Clearly, the level of trust around here has diminished to the point that every move we make is questioned. That's unfortunate but it's the reality. It doesn't change the fact, though, that we're still committed to doing our jobs in a fair and balanced way. Just because we don't come out and provide all of the evidence that supports our decisions doesn't mean that we're acting capriciously.

Bob I know I'm not privvie to all the pm's, and nor do I want to be. That's why I packed in the modding. Nor do I as a rule get involved in these debates as to why people were banned, for precisely that reason.

It kind of seems pointless debating the issue now Red has revealed what he is going through at Home, but anyway i felt that at least two of the people who got kicked off were at the very least expremely unlucky. What makes it worse, is the inconsistency as other people are able to use the forum diplomatic immunity card on a daily basis. Two of the people kicked off have recieved absolute dogs abuse on here over the last month or so, largely because they don't agree with the majority and are prepared to say so.

Anyway enough of it. anybody reading the thread and thinking what happened was right just doesn't see it the way I see it, which is fine.

Terrible news about your situation Red, and when I go to bed in a minute I'll say a prayer for you and yours mate. You have my heartfelt sympathies Red, I'm so sorry for you and the Mrs.

by **GYBS** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 12:22 pm

dawson99 wrote:
GYBS wrote:i got a feeling they are previously banned memebers returning to the forum daws - the fact macroon was calling someone a muppet within 5 posts of registering just points it that way

proof tho? if not then we are getting bad. need to give benefit before banning, assume makes an out of u and me lol

what do you do thou daws ? play it safe and get rid early or give them benfit of doubt and then be proved they are returning mebers and they create trouble ??

by **dawson99** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 12:24 pm

GYBS wrote:
dawson99 wrote:
GYBS wrote:i got a feeling they are previously banned memebers returning to the forum daws - the fact macroon was calling someone a muppet within 5 posts of registering just points it that way

proof tho? if not then we are getting bad. need to give benefit before banning, assume makes an out of u and me lol

what do you do thou daws ? play it safe and get rid early or give them benfit of doubt and then be proved they are returning mebers and they create trouble ??

benefit of doubt always until they do something to proove otherwise. and just ask right out... people should be man enough to admit. otherwise any new member witha different opinion will get banned

by **GYBS** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 12:25 pm

i guess you just have to go with instinct mate - three memebers get banned the next day three new memebers register and are familiar with the way they post already after a couple of posts just screams out suspect to you .

by **Judge** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 12:46 pm

red37 wrote:
bigmick wrote:It's probably worth remembering though that Bam wasn't on the forum yesterday when four people got banned.

Wrong again.

He was one of the 4 that was 'deleted' He even goes so far as to admit it himself. The fine figure of a character that he is.

btw his 'facts' are not entirely accurate - then again, where's the surprise in that.

As for you dawson - yep theyre just words on an internet. But words that are said to me, the father of 3 smashing kids - one of whom is terminally ill.

Just words though...no real harm done eh.

very sorry to hear about one of your kids sick mate

im not religious, but i hope there is a god and he will intervene for the right reasons

by **bunglemark2** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 1:14 pm

Judge wrote:
red37 wrote:
bigmick wrote:It's probably worth remembering though that Bam wasn't on the forum yesterday when four people got banned.

Wrong again.

He was one of the 4 that was 'deleted' He even goes so far as to admit it himself. The fine figure of a character that he is.

btw his 'facts' are not entirely accurate - then again, where's the surprise in that.

As for you dawson - yep theyre just words on an internet. But words that are said to me, the father of 3 smashing kids - one of whom is terminally ill.

Just words though...no real harm done eh.

very sorry to hear about one of your kids sick mate

im not religious, but i hope there is a god and he will intervene for the right reasons

Hear, hear...
Very sorry to hear that mate....

by **Igor Zidane** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 1:30 pm

Feck me , puts it all into perspective don't yer think ?

by **red37** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 1:35 pm

Listen. I think we've seen the ar5e end of this thread by now...a lot of views have been aired. Some of them not entirely truthful if im going to be allowed a 'counterstrike'. Others maybe needed to get something from their chest (myself included i guess)

However....

It is time to end this chapter. And move along, there is little to be said from here on in (sp: im sure that can exist as one whole word!) that hasn't already been mentioned.

How about a new leaf - a fresh start. And take into account the principles upon which the forum operates for a change? It can work...it has worked before. Lets see that put into practice. From ALL quarters eh?

I will leave this open for the remainder of today, so as to give anyone who HASN'T - an opportunity to air their opinion. Then it will be closed.

Peace.

by **GYBS** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 1:35 pm

sounds good to me red .

by **Judge** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 1:36 pm

got my vote

Liverpool FC Forum

What kind of losers are we?

Who is online