Complaint and responses about moderating

Discussion in 'Customer Service' started by MrRC, Jul 8, 2010.

  1. Caesar

    Caesar Moderator
    Staff Member

    Mar 3, 2004
    Oztraya
    Given that the forum had almost 6,500 posts during the 4 weeks of the tournament, and most match threads received between 10,000 and 40,000 views each, I'm pretty happy with a grand total of 3 vocal whingers. Especially given that for every one post complaining about the moderation I can list half a dozen posts/PMs/rep messages thanking us for taking a tight line.

    So thanks for participating in a very successful World Cup on BigSoccer! I look forward to seeing everyone again for Brazil in 4 years.
     
  2. bluedevils

    bluedevils Member

    Nov 17, 2002
    USA
    It is pretty well established that no matter what the topic or medium, the people you hear from are the complainers. That's not to say people shouldn't complain, but the point is that most people do NOT bother to say, 'I like this' or 'I am happy about what you are doing.' They simply go on about their business.

    If the WC Ref forum was allowed to be a place where people could come in willy-nilly and make stupid, ignorant, inflammatory comments about how piss-poor so-and-so referee was in this match or that, the forum would have been essentially worthless and it would have been impossible to conduct the sort of discussions that the moderators of this site wanted to see in this forum.

    If a few posters' feelings were hurt along the way, I think that is an acceptable amount of collateral damage.
     
  3. dark knight

    dark knight Super Moderator
    Staff Member

    Dec 15, 1999
    Club:
    Leicester City FC

    What conclusions have you come to from my foreign syntax?

    Honestly, I encourage the moderators to extend forum bans if posters are not making an effort to understand what the issue is. Your admitted personal crusade to make a point about the moderator really isn't what the forum is about, and should be handled via personal message. One person's sidebar is of very little interest to most members of the forum, and this is evident by the large number of complaints that the mods received.

    No mod or referee is perfect, nor is there often a perfect solution that makes everyone happy. If you are on the unhappy side of a decision we encourage you to understand that the job is mostly thankless (aside from the high salary) and help us to move on.
     
  4. BobanFan

    BobanFan Member+

    Jun 28, 2007
    Club:
    AC Milan
    In this letter I intend to express my views about Tall Tower Man with gentleness and respect. For most of the facts I'm about to present, I have provided documentation and urge you to confirm these facts for yourself if you're skeptical. While it is not my purpose to incriminate or exculpate or vindicate or castigate, I am convinced that there will be a strong effort on his part to make it virtually impossible to fire incompetent workers by next weekend. This effort will be disguised, of course. It will be cloaked in deceit, as such efforts always are. That's why I'm informing you that in a tacit concession of defeat, Tall Tower Man is now openly calling for the abridgment of various freedoms to accomplish coercively what his sex-crazed vaporings have failed at. His reckless janissaries are nothing more than subservient blobs of easily controlled protoplasm. That's why they're so willing to help Tall Tower Man repeat the mistakes of the past.
    Tall Tower Man's abysmal off-the-cuff comments are meticulously designed to keep the population unaware, uneducated, dumbed down, and focused on stupefying activities like video games. The intention is to prevent people from noticing that Tall Tower Man has been poking someone's eyes out. If his expositions get any more truculent, I expect they'll grow legs and attack me in my sleep. Tall Tower Man is extremely grumpy. In fact, my Grumpy-O-Meter confirms that the objection may still be raised that what I call licentious bureaucrats should be fêted at wine-and-cheese fund-raisers. At first glance this sounds almost believable yet the following must be borne in mind: Even children are not safe from Tall Tower Man's malign ethics. How much more illumination does that fact need before Tall Tower Man can grasp it? Assuming the answer is "a substantial amount", let me point out that Tall Tower Man's camp has found a rallying cry for its upcoming battle against our most treasured liberties. That rallying cry is, "Tall Tower Man's protests are Holy Writ!" It's quotes like that that make me realize that Tall Tower Man likes to brag about how the members of his coalition are ideologically diverse. Perhaps that means that some of them prefer Stalin over Hitler. In any case, people tell me that Tall Tower Man frequently writes self-contradictory, nonsensical "sentences" that are actually just phrases or sentence fragments filled with grammatical, spelling, capitalization, and punctuation errors. And the people who tell me this are correct, of course.
    The implications of frightful imperialism may seem theoretical, but they have concrete meaning for thousands of people. Human nature being what it is, it is not surprising that there is no such thing as evil in the abstract. It exists only in the evil deeds of evil people like Tall Tower Man. Having said that, let me add that he occasionally writes letters accusing me and my friends of being the most fatuous tossers I've ever seen. These letters are typically couched in gutter language (which is doubtless the language in which he habitually thinks) and serve no purpose other than to convince me that life is a search for the true, the good, and the beautiful. It is not, as he believes, an excuse to have more impact on Earth's biological, geological, and chemical systems during our lifetime and our children's than all preceding human generations had together. Tall Tower Man's lieutenants have tried repeatedly to assure me that Tall Tower Man will eventually tire of his plan to manufacture outrage at his foes by attributing to them all sorts of insecure hypnopompic insights and will then step aside and let us rage, rage against the dying of the light. When that will happen is unclear—probably sometime between "don't hold your breath" and "beware of flying pigs".
    In order to convince us that elected national governments are not accountable to their own people, Tall Tower Man often turns to the old propagandist trick of comparing results brought about by entirely dissimilar causes. I laughed so hard I almost cried when he stated publicly that his tracts are Right with a capital R. You just can't make this stuff up—at least, not without noticing that anyone—you or I or a Martian just arrived in a flying saucer—who wants to shape a world of dignity and harmony, a world of justice, solidarity, liberty, and prosperity should realize that Tall Tower Man says that he wants to make life better for everyone. Lacking a coherent ideology, however, Tall Tower Man always ends up preventing me from getting my work done. Some people are responsible and others are not. Tall Tower Man falls into the category of "not". He claims that everyone who scrambles aboard the Tall Tower Man bandwagon is guaranteed a smooth ride. I maintain that the absurdities within that claim speak for themselves although I should add that Tall Tower Man has gone way too far with his no-compromise attitude. I won't dwell on that except to direct your attention to the brazen manner in which he has been trying to distract attention from more important issues.
    On the other hand, Tall Tower Man recently claimed that logorrheic, hectoring vigilantes and unctuous proponents of terrorism should rule this country. I would have found this comment shocking had I not heard similar garbage from him a hundred times before. This is a free country, and I claim we ought to keep it that way. I don't have time to go into this in as much detail as I should, but Tall Tower Man is firmly convinced that he is a refined gentleman with the soundest education and morals you can imagine. His belief is controverted, however, by the weight of the evidence indicating that if Tall Tower Man hadn't been spawning a society in which those with the most deviant lifestyle, detestable behavior, or personal failures are given the most by the government, it simply would not have occurred to me to write the letter you now are reading. Why, I might have taken the day off altogether. Or maybe I would have been out preventing Tall Tower Man's batty newsgroup postings from spreading like a malignant tumor. In any case, Tall Tower Man should work with us, not step in at the eleventh hour and hog all the glory.
    Tall Tower Man is the picture of the insane person on the street, babbling to a tree, a wall, or a cloud, which cannot and does not respond to his catch-phrases. Although the Battle of Waterloo may have been won on the playing fields of Eton I nevertheless think that Tall Tower Man is a heterogeneous conglomeration of everything cold-blooded, execrable, and disloyal. But wait—as they say on late-night television infomercials—there's more: I find that some of Tall Tower Man's choices of words in his epigrams would not have been mine. For example, I would have substituted "vengeful" for "magnetohydrodynamics" and "muzzy-headed" for "succinylsulphathiazole." My goal is to get him to realize that fascism is his main weapon and his chief means of convincing his habitués to destroy our moral fiber. Of course, if he insists on remaining an ignorant, uninformed, and ill-informed twerp, that's his prerogative. If anything, according to Tall Tower Man, he does the things he does "for the children". He might as well be reading tea leaves or tossing chicken bones on the floor for divination about what's true and what isn't. Maybe then Tall Tower Man would realize that I have some advice for him. He should keep his mouth shut until he stops being such a contemptuous, rude chiseler and starts being at least one of informative, agreeable, creative, or entertaining.
    Tall Tower Man's view is that it is his moral imperative to prop up corrupt despots around the world. If Tall Tower Man's peevish assistants had any moral or intellectual training, such a position would indubitably be rendered revolting to their better feelings. Tall Tower Man's compeers are too impuissant to stand up to him. The same holds true for refractory, gin-swilling ruthless-types.
    If we don't lift the fog from Tall Tower Man's thinking, then Tall Tower Man will soon become unstoppable. No borders will be able to detain him. No united global opinion will be able to isolate him. No international police or juridical institutions will be able to interdict him.
    This is not Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia, where the state would be eager to clear forests, strip the topsoil, and turn a natural paradise into a dust bowl through a self-induced drought. Not yet, at least. But no matter what else we do, our first move must be to educate everyone about how it remains to be seen if Tall Tower Man will fragment the nation into politically disharmonious units in a lustrum or two. That's the first step: education. Education alone is not enough, of course. We must also focus on concrete facts, on hard news, on analyzing and interpreting what's happening in the world. He, having recently learned a smattering of scientific terminology, uses it to keep a close eye on those who look like they might think an unapproved thought. Well, that's getting away from my main topic, which is that the worst classes of blockish freaks of nature there are make people weak and dependent. That said, we mustn't lose sight of who the real enemy is: Tall Tower Man and his recalcitrant trained seals.
    Let's try to understand what handing over our rights to Tall Tower Man will really mean. It certainly won't mean that we'll be able to freely bring meaning, direction, and purpose into our lives. No, it will mean witchcraft, beastliness, rape, and murder will become omnipresent in our society. It will mean a descent back into the jungle. No man who values himself, who has any regard for sound morality, or who feels any desire to see intellectual progress made certain, can rightfully join his disrespectful attempt to distort and trivialize the debate surrounding Jacobinism. Finally, this has been a good deal of reading, and certainly difficult reading at that. Still, I hope you walk away from it with the new knowledge that human life is full of artificiality, perversion, and misery, much of which is caused by cynical, snotty dirtbags.
     
  5. aerez

    aerez Member+

    River Plate
    Argentina
    Jul 8, 2006
    Nat'l Team:
    Argentina
    Clearly the Op is rather intelligent, I can't condone his presentation or attitude, whichever way you want to see it, but at the same time I can neither disagree or agree with his opinions, nor can I say that I'm not surprised by the illogical punishments if we go by the OP's point of view.
     
  6. MrRC

    MrRC Member

    Jun 17, 2009
    Now where is YOUR seven point infraction and forum ban?

    This post is far worse than anything which I wrote in the WC refereeing forum. I never resorted to name-calling or outright insults. You just have and deserve to be penalized for it.

    For the record, I also didn't ever write that the referee is terrible or biased and screwing one of the teams as several posters did, and thanks to the info provided by Caesar I can now state with certainty that not one of them was banned. The forum instructions stated that was the big no-no.

    The above post by Caesar is a perfect example of my main complaint--the moderators can write whatever they please and are not held to the same standard as the rest of the posters. Apparently moderators can post off-topic material and call others unpleasant names with impunity, but when a regular poster disagrees with one and complains that poster is sanctioned and banned.
     
  7. Horsehead

    Horsehead Super Moderator
    Staff Member

    Nov 2, 2006
    Los Angeles
    Take off that phony halo.

    I'm the one who facilitated the forum ban and frankly, I was surprised it took so long for them to request it. You had enough warnings and light infractions to try to get you to understand the tenor and the purpose of that forum. The mods were patient and put up with a lot from you. I can see all the posts they had to delete and bin where you were taking snipes at other posters and being a..... yes, I'll say it..... a jackass. To use the lingo of that forum, it was a clear case of PI.

    There were many users who came in not understanding the purpose of the WC referee forum but all except for a few did quickly "get it." When someone does not respond to warnings or infractions or deleted posts, we have to give up trying to make them understand and send them away so the rest of the members and readers can enjoy the forum. The mods of that forum did an incredible job with the amount of traffic and uproar and headaches. If you think you can run a better forum, by all means, good luck to you.
     
  8. MrRC

    MrRC Member

    Jun 17, 2009
    That's a terribly unprofessional post. You should be ashamed of yourself.
    I expected more from a Super Moderator. Until now you weren't even man enough to inform me that YOU were the one who banned me from the WC forum. You let Caesar take that responsibility.

    I certainly admit that my behavior hasn't been perfect, but your characterization of my infraction history is woefully inaccurate. Here is the complete list:

    7 point(s) total
    Latest Infractions Received Post Date Expires Points Reason Posted By Private 11 Jul 2010 07:00 AM 7 (07:00 AM 08 Aug 2010) Trolling - Severe Dark Knight

    Private 07 Jul 2010 02:18 PM Expired 1 Minor Infraction - Moderator Defined Caesar

    Private
    06 Jul 2010 06:56 AM Expired 1 Minor Infraction - Moderator Defined MassachusettsRef [​IMG]

    Private
    05 Jul 2010 08:40 AM Expired 0 Minor Infraction - Moderator Defined IASocFan [​IMG]

    Welcome back Clatts 17 Aug 2009 05:19 AM Expired 1 Abused/Flamed Users - Basic IASocFan


    As anyone can see, I hadn't received an infraction in almost a year until a couple of disagreements during the WC. When people argue passionately about this sport, I think that it is natural that we are going to have a couple of flare ups. My zero point infraction on July 5 from IASocFan was for just that. LY and I got into it and both of us were warned. No problem. We moved on.
    After that my only infractions came from the situation with MassRef. He didn't like my pointing out that celeste4ever was not an objective analyst when it came to Uruguay matches. Moderator Alberto flat out called him "a homer." Then when I had the audacity to criticize his referee guessing game, he got his buddy Caesar to rush in and whack me again.
    THOSE WERE THE ONLY TWO POINTS ON MY RECORD THIS CALENDAR YEAR!
    Yet the next thing that I know I receive a SEVEN point infraction and a ban for a sarcastic post that most would consider mild. My posts were far below that threshold and these punishments were WAY out of proportion for the content of my post. I've already provided the entire text of that above in this thread.

    Now if you wish to go through the delete bins and pull out the posts of mine which mods deleted and post them here for all to see that is fine with me. I have nothing to hide. I didn't call anyone any names like you and Caesar just did. In fact, several posters have commented that my posts were informative and helpful. To be fair you need to acknowledge that feedback as well.

    As for your challenge to me about doing a better job, I accept. Go ahead make me a moderator. Please give me the same power as MassRef and Caesar. Let us be on even terms.

    Of course, I know that you won't do it. You would then have to be accountable for your actions. You would then justly receive infractions for your name-calling and lack of tact. Nah, you won't admit an outsider to the moderator clique. Thanks for posting because you have certainly proven my point about the moderating on this forum.
     
  9. MrRC

    MrRC Member

    Jun 17, 2009
    Maybe you aren't a non-native English-speaker after all. Perhaps you were just channeling your inner Yoda for a moment there. It was confusing to me.

    1. I felt that I tried to understand what the issue was. I concluded that it was simply a difference of opinion between one moderator and myself.
    2. My personal crusade against a particular moderator was inappropriate and I've renounced it.
    3. I agree with you about the personal sidebars. That is the way that I felt about that particular moderator's constant guessing games.
    4. After I posted my objection and was rebuked, I resolved to take my penalty in stride and serve my time, even though I didn't agree with the final decision. However, now that the stated time has elapsed and I've asked to be reinstated, I'm being hit with a capricious indefinite ban. That's not right.
    5. I'm willing to step up and serve as a moderator. If I am going to criticize them, then I had better be willing to try my hand at the task. I believe in put-up or shut-up.
     
  10. Caesar

    Caesar Moderator
    Staff Member

    Mar 3, 2004
    Oztraya
    Aside from the fact that Horsehead isn't man enough for anything, it was in fact my responsibility. Super Moderators implement bans at the recommendation of Moderators. I requested it, and I determined the length.

    Err... that was a polite invitation to take your business elsewhere if you don't like how things are done on this site, not an offer of employment. Sorry to disappoint.

    You were given multiple infractions and addressed in multiple posts and PMs from every moderator of the Refereeing forum regarding the consistent, ongoing problems with your posting and the possibility of a ban. Yet you chose to ignore it all. To this date neither myself nor either of the other moderators have received from you (1) any acknowledgement of the problems with your behaviour that caused the ban, (2) any apology for the massive waste of time you have been, or (3) any undertaking to desist from the problematic behaviour if you were allowed to return.

    All that would be recommended before we even CONSIDERED letting you back into the forum, and even if we received all that we might still consider you simply not worth the trouble. That is our prerogative. You have no inherent right to post there.

    Basically, we run the forum for the benefit of the community and will show limitless patience with people who participate in good faith, contribute positively and endeavour to play by the rules with a minimum of disruption. Those who don't... well, we don't bother with. Life's too short.

    The ball is in YOUR court. My honest advice? Take a deep breath. DON'T type that enormous response that's just itching to come out. Go away, and with actions rather than words demonstrate to us that you want to contribute postively without picking fights, pissing posters & moderators off, posting pages of self-righteous outrage and derailing threads.

    Show us that we're wrong about you. We WANT to be wrong. I may be a pompous jerk, but I don't bear grudges - as many a poster on this board will tell you. Neither does MassRef. Nothing makes us happier than a poster who wants to leave the past in the past and move forward in good spirit.

    It's over to you.
     
  11. USSF REF

    USSF REF Guest

    I think you guys, ALL OF YOUS, are taking yourselves way too seriously. This is a souped up bulletin board! We've got the internet cops chasing down the digital sarcasm peddlers... :rolleyes:

    :rolleyes:

    Silly people.
     
  12. Cevno

    Cevno Member+

    Aug 27, 2005
    Shifting.
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    There weren't just 3 "whingers".There were many more.

    Infact if you looka at the thread there is evidence of 5 . And there were more too.And if you had not removed my posts asking people to post there to protest then there would have been more(which massref eventually allowed in one thread) "Whinger" as you put it.
    While i would like to say posters who objected to the the ridiculous moderation. I think this shows the attitude of the moderators.

    I got 2 neg rep for that ridiculous infractions and have got 4 positive reps since in my efforts to expose the ridiculous moderation.
     
  13. bluedevils

    bluedevils Member

    Nov 17, 2002
    USA
    It doesn't change the fact that there are MANY MANY more people who LIKED the strict moderation in the WC Ref forum. If you don't believe that, you are just fooling yourself.
     
  14. Cevno

    Cevno Member+

    Aug 27, 2005
    Shifting.
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Can you please tell me who are the people ,specially non-referees who were critical of the referee in one of the games and are happy with the moderation?

    As long as you praised the referee or remained neutral or not criticising the moderation was fine.BUT AS SOON AS YOU tried to point out shortcomings and inefficiencies almost everything was deemed to be beyond the rules because the mods had been given a mandate to be strict,which was applied unnecessarily.

    And seeing that most referees post there ,and many many like Liquidyogi defended the referee all times,someone criticising the referee was treated too critically. Besides still i do not agree that many many more were pleased with the modding.
    There were many voices even referees vocal agaisnt the moderation and you just cannot assume that the silent majority of non referees were pleased with the moderation.
     
  15. bluedevils

    bluedevils Member

    Nov 17, 2002
    USA
    That is EXACTLY what I will continue to assume. That is how things are, not just on this website but in every field of human endeavor...the people who speak up are the ones who are upset or mad or have a negative feeling or a complaint. People who are happy with something do not normally take the time to stop and say, 'I have no complaints, I'm happy.'

    The moderators were very clear about what would be tolerated, what wouldn't, etc etc etc. It was explained in sticky threads, it was explained over and over again by numerous moderators. It is my opinion that the rules were enforced properly 99.9% of the time. People who did not want to abide by the rules should have gone elsewhere instead of pushing the boundaries.

    Many people, including referees, were negative about the refereeing. The 'problem' is, if you want to consider it a problem, that referees understand more than non-referees about how to referee. They understand what a referee must consider. And frankly, in many cases non-referees are too negative about refereeing! It is easy for people who don't know anything about how to referee to complain about the refereeing.

    The WC Ref forum was NOT the place to say, 'this ref sucked' or 'he did not have the balls to make the right call' or crap like that. There were other places to make those comments, in other forums.

    The WC Ref forum has TONS and TONS of discussion about poor refereeing decisions, poor refereeing performances, missed calls, missed goals, missed offside decisions, harsh yellow cards, harsh red cards...a large portion of the discussion was about this type of stuff.

    If you are trying to characterize the forum and the moderators as being overly protective of the referees...well, I think that is ridiculous. Totally untrue.
     
  16. Cevno

    Cevno Member+

    Aug 27, 2005
    Shifting.
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    It's more a case of "As long as this kind of bad moderation does not affect ,who cares and who wants to get in the bad books of the moderators in any case" .
    Besides as one of the reps in my account pointed out "Save your attempts,the so called "Customer service" always sides with the moderators.
    So what the point complaining and being labelled as "Whingers" without reason by a moderator who thinks he can do no wrong?
     
  17. Cevno

    Cevno Member+

    Aug 27, 2005
    Shifting.
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    The rest of the your post i have already elaborated on how questioning whether the referee chickened out in making the call or whether he was competent or not is analysis in the other thread i started saying "Infraction received"

    I did not get a clear answer point wise just replies trying to enforce self interpretation of rules and also posts saying that this is the way it is.
     
  18. bluedevils

    bluedevils Member

    Nov 17, 2002
    USA
    I've got nothing more to say. The moderators have a thankless job. They have other lives. They spend a TON of time trying to make this a good place to have discussions about The Beautiful Game. They do their best. They are human beings. They get sick and tired of some of the rude, smart-ass people who post on these forums.

    At some point, you just have to accept what you are told and move on.
     
  19. Lloyd Heilbrunn

    Lloyd Heilbrunn Member+

    Feb 11, 2002
    Jupiter, Fl.
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I am a non ref who spent a lot of time there. The moderation was fine and many of the guys complaining were engaged in borderline or over the borderline trolling......
     
  20. Ismitje

    Ismitje Super Moderator

    Dec 30, 2000
    The Palouse
    Club:
    Real Salt Lake
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    An update: after every major tournament, we conduct a review of how things went in all of the forums. In this case, we're reviewing General, Group Stages, Knockout Rounds, Refereeing, and Fans and Travel. We can compare back to 2002 and 2006 and see what worked, what hasn't, and what we might tweak. The 2010 World Cup forums will probably be shut down within a week or so if not sooner, with conversation shifting to the FIFA and Tournaments forums.

    To be clear, the Referee forums were moderated how we intended them to be, quite strictly, and overall we are pleased with how things went. But just because they were moderated how we wanted does not mean we are not reviewing to make changes in 2014, as there were enough folks who did not find what they wanted in the referee forum to prompt discussion. One idea that I like is to model the WC referee forum on the US Mens and MLS parent forums, with a News and Analysis subforum and a General forum, one being moderated very closely and the other much more open. There'll be more discussion in about three and a half years when we get ready again.

    Bottom line, even a minority can have a perspective worth pursuing, and we'll pursue we'll pursue this in the future.
     
  21. soccernutter

    soccernutter Moderator
    Staff Member

    Tottenham Hotspur
    Aug 22, 2001
    Near the mountains.
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    How is hoping the ref in the final fails any sort analysis? How it part of a reasonable (pro or con) discussion in a forum dedicated to officiating analysis?
     
  22. refmedic

    refmedic Member

    Sep 22, 2008
    I've tried to stay out of this forum, because as bluedevils said, usually those who are pissed are the ones who complain, and that has certainly been the case with the underprivileged few whiners that I have read about here. Seeing how I wasn't upset with the moderating, I didn't have anything to add to this thread, but now you are all getting a little ridiculous. I thought the WC referee forum was moderated quite well. The moderators were able to wade through the thousands of posts and cherry pick the bullshit out of the real analysis. How many times did they have to tell people that if they wanted to post partisan attacks or blanket statements that added nothing to the discussion (i.e. "this ref sucks", or "this ref is a homer", etc.). I posted in most of the threads, and usually quite often. I was VERY critical of refereeing performances and referee decisions when i felt it necessary. I attempted to keep my comments limited to a true analysis, based on the LOTG and my officiating experience, not based on my feelings as a fan. I feel that I succeeded most of the time, although I did stray a bit. Most of all, I attempted to be as respectful as I possibly could and add to the conversation in a constructive manner. There were many posters, especially the OP in this thread, who were not objective or respectful, and the moderators smacked them around when necessary. For that I thank them. I made some pretty scathing comments about many referees and decisions throughout this tournament. I received ZERO infractions. The rules were pretty simple, and they were not a secret by any means. If people want to follow them, then they can stick around and have a good time. If you don't want to follow them, then reap the consequences. Either way, I'm pretty tired of the bitching, so those of you who are complaining, AFTER THE TOURNAMENT IS OVER, you can feel free to take your ball and go home.
     
  23. Cevno

    Cevno Member+

    Aug 27, 2005
    Shifting.
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1475785

    I have explained this point by point in that thread.

    Please go through it and i can debate as much as you want. It was clearly a hope i had so that the the mistakes are not covered up in the earlier rounds and Fifa changes for the better and is forced too accept modern techniques and technology and the dissenting referees who want full control get in line too.
    Besides it would also give justice too Mexico and England along with other teams who were hard done and it would mean that the big mistakes are not forgotten down the line.
    So it is a analysis that how a mistake in the final would improve the game for better and also prevent FIFA from brushing big mistakes under the carpet.

    And i posted it in the thread about world cup final referees.How was it trolling?
    I am still awaiting a decent reply which does not say that's the way it is.

    And i think we should continue the discussion in that thread as i think my matter is completely different from THE starter of this thread who went about doing some silly things,though certainly caused by bad moderation.
     
  24. soccernutter

    soccernutter Moderator
    Staff Member

    Tottenham Hotspur
    Aug 22, 2001
    Near the mountains.
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Since you don't seem to be getting it...

    Your post was the 15th post in said thread (edited by MassRef to remove trolling comments - full post in first post of this thread). Your analysis of the "Candidates for the Final" was (the edited part):
    (That is what earned you an infraction.)

    Within that post, you made it known that you thought the officiating was horrible. Fair and reasonable opinion based on common knowledge. But then you said you hoped the showcase event would be a failure for the officials. AND you did that in the officiating forum.

    To put it more clearly, it would be like me, and non-ManU supporter - going to the ManU forum and saying something to the effect:
    Do you get it? First two comment are fair, but the third is insulting and disrespectful.
     
  25. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Because of another thread in the moderators forum, I've gone back and read this thread. I will say two things:

    1) I stand by my handling of the celeste4life situation. You were warned, and you carried on. Even in your initial response to me, though you disputed the infraction (and argued for a warning) you admitted that you had gone too far with him:

    In other words, this whole episode stems from you disputing the level of sanction. For the record, I went with a 1-pt infraction rather than a 0-pt warning for two reasons. First, because you had been warned in the forum itself. And second, because you had received an official 0-pt warning from IASocFan in the referee forum the previous day. It didn't make sense, in my eyes, to continue with warnings.

    We can debate all day whether celeste4life was biased or not. In the end, it doesn't matter unless you are going to accuse every single American referee poster who enters that forum and calls the USMNT "we" of the very same bias. That wasn't being done, so it's not fair to single out a Uruguayan non-referee. No amount of arguing will change my opinion on that. And bringing up his alleged bias in every thread he posted in amounted to harassment

    2) As to the passages I've quoted above. They are simply not true. In fact, they are either blatant lies or they stem from your lack of information. But even if the stem from lack of information, you choose to resort to conjecture and make accusations that you cannot substantiate. The facts are I never deleted a post that was solely critical of me. In fact, I intentionally and deliberately left several such posts, even though they don't belong in a regular match thread, so that I would not be accused of bias. There were reported posts including critiques of me that I left up, despite having full justification to remove them because they were in the wrong venue. Caesar removed several posts and dark knight infracted you... Caesar did so explicitly against my wishes and dark knight took action without me ever communicating with him. Those are the facts. So it really rubs me the wrong way when you enter into an argument like this and accuse me of things of which I'm not guilty. If you want to debate the merits of the single infraction I gave you, go right ahead. As I said, you won't be changing my mind on that subject. But don't throw out wild accusations that you have no evidence to support. I wouldn't even feel the need to make this post (really, point #1 is a repeat for me) if I didn't feel I needed to defend myself against these allegations.
     

Share This Page