hello to any mods that may have a moment to read this, i have recently received 4 infraction points from this clown on two occasions. he has take a personal grudge and now gives out infraction for any posting i make. most recent was for typing 'double trouble setting up socks to neg rep me. lolol. first calls trolling where there is none, then breaks the sites tos to set up socks. either you are following the rules or not,little man, make your mind up.'. this is clearly not trolling , espcially as it is blindingly obvious that this mod has several socks. can another mod possibly look into this situation as i think it is a clear abuse of bs tos.
not up to me to prove, but the 2 unwaranted infractions, are these not contestable, or can are mods just laws unto themselves? oh, and guess where you can put that popcorn?
the accusation is neither here nor there. the accusation that requires attention is that the infractions he is giving out are unwarranted. the question i made is wrt what recourse i have to call in to question abuse of mod priveledges. pretending that authortiy is never abused in life is pointless, we know in all walks of life that any power is likely to be abused by small minded people. if bs does not have any system for looking at mod behaviour/use of power i would be very surprised. is there anything in place? not directing this at soccer nutter or his ass full of popped corn but any mod that might be helpfull enough to respond in a relevant fashion, which in 2 posts he has not done so, merely offered glib retorts.
lost, I want to help you but it's not easy to understand what you are trying to say here. I'll give it a try... You said he infracts all your posts. I checked your recent posting and I just don't see that he infracts everyone of your posts. Not sure what you are talking about with that. (EDIT: Okay, you mean in the Tottenham forum. Please be clear of your complaint.) I've now looked at your recent posting in the Tottenham forum. You were allowed quite a bit of posts that aggressively slagged their team during a game thread that was very difficult for the Spurs. Your position that you should be able to trash them because you're a fan of the English league does not really matter to the true supporters of that club. If other member(s) negrepped a post that was also infracted it doesn't mean that it must be a moderator sock. It should tell you that others also did not appreciate your contributions. Between the infractions and negreps, the mods and participants in that forum seem to be urging you to make better posts that add quality to the thread. You were given a lot of leeway in that thread but eventually they wanted you to stop.
thank you very much mr head. if you read through that thread, there was no way i was not clearly and actively supporting tottenham. i thought harrys tactics stunk, and they clearly did, and i should be allowed to say this. so, may i ask, how was i trolling? is the double harrys pr agent and lawyer or something? i also have some suspicions that double has socks, this is my opinion and i am not breaching any rules by saying this. again, how is this trolling? i would also like to be able to post on the tottenham forums without fear of being infracted everytime i post there. i recieved positive rep from readers on that forum, so clearly my posts are not entirely without merit. i feel that if at least one of the 2 infractions given out were recinded it would send a message to the mod in question that he cannot just hand out points willy nilly without fear of sanction. some forums i go on, such as anything to do with portugal, the mods will just give out infractions for anyone who is english, this i have come to accept and to be honest i dont care. however on a spurs forum, where i am clearly supporting the side, i think it is particularly galling and irritating to have to put up with small minded and unjust bs just because some pathetic part time fan (who supports chelsea and spurs, the poor , dimwitted fool) knows nothing about football or football critisism, and has the power to ruin other peoples use of a public forum. i see also from his page that i am not the only one with clear reasons to suggest that he is not doing his job properly. thanks for your time.
I see nothing wrong with Lost's intial post that was infracted tbh..... Arry has as many detractors as fans these days. Warning at most would have probably been sufficient. My 2 cents.
You were not clearly supporting Tottenham. You are not known on the Spurs forum. As one will read your posts before they were deleted, they did not read as overly friendly towards Spurs. BTW - Double does not support Chelsea
How is he suppose to PROVE something, when you have the tools to look it up yourself. Regardless, he's making a complaint, here, so people who can look into it can check it out. Well, here's one opinion from a moderator, contrary to other opinions from moderators. This means that one decision is not soley right, and that that LOST actually has some back up with his point to make this thread.
I'm just going by his initial post that was infracted. I don't have the details as to the lead up to the infractions. Just a quick glance at the thread, it seems Lost was a bit upset at the tactics, etc.. employed by Rednapp. Obviously, if he is not a regular on that forum, and just there to wind up others, than that is a different story. I don't agree with Lost on any of his disgruntlements on the Spurs forum mod. My opinion is solely based about the initial infraction.
Lost - did you make an attempt to discuss with the moderator that you were a fan of the team but upset about the tactics?
i did point out that what i said was not trolling as i was supporting the side but this didnt have any impact. furthermore, when accusing the mod of having socks the next day this resulted in more infraction points. so, congenial debate was prolly not going to work. i did also contention that i hope that the double gets cancer, which wasnt very nice, but im nothing if not honest. thanks for the interest, it is reassuring that debate over these things is possible on bs, something i had almost no faith in before hand. can i ask again though, is there a method of appealing infraction points, and to whom is this done, or is it just refered to the general 'council' and await a judgement, like zod and his crew in superman 1 and 2?
Lost, I have looked it your recent posting history and you have a style that can be thought of as antagonistic, or at the least, harsh. Read below to see why that is important. The accusation that the infraction should be removed is never ignored. But you also made the accusation that double as socks. You provided no evidence to back up your accusation and in light of your style of posting in the thread in question as well as your first post in this thread I wanted to see if you were being sincere or not. I do not think anybody should have socks, specially mods. Lost, nobody has a god given right to post where ever they want or whatever they want. (hehehe...horsey got called a man...again!) if you concede another tonight without scoring, i would fire redknapp immediately. ive seen school kids with better gameplans and more professional execution of tactics than this pub team 2 away goals is fine, hopefully the swiss collapse. total disgrace, you lot should be in the europa league already. sorry for my harshness. arry needs to grow a fking brain more like. no chance of this... its typical of brit managers when they come up against the non brit style. suddenly everything goes horrendously wrong for no apparent reason. but if it always happens, and it almost always does, there has to be a reason. the reason is tactical. harry has had a few chances in europe in his career and blown the lot, so i couldnt see any reason for optimism going into the qualifiers. when you were drawn against such tiny, miniscule, insignificant opposition i thought that maybe, perhaps, he could force his way over the finnishing line. sadly, even the joke side that is bern were too strong for his feeble system of throw shit at the wall and hope some of it sticks. i fear for the dignity of spurs and the epl if you get the kind of group of death that you are statistically very likely to get. but, all i want is for spurs to qualify. beyond that, its up to them what they do, but till then they have a responsibility ( or should have) to ensure that the epl has 4 sides in the cl. anything else is total humiliation and a disaster, regardless of who they were drawn against. on this occasion, redknapp lost the game and is lucky to still be in with a chance. ...though if you were to approach arry with any of these details [previous oppponents played by English sides] im sure you would only go as far to confuse the poor fellow, attention to detail is not his strong suite. hanging out on your own? i wonder why. (direct responce to Double's comment about arriving to the pub, alone, during the middle of the work day!) nice one arry, you fking kunt. The above the, in italics, are things you said in the thread in question. All of them may be fair or even true but from someone with your posting history in the Spurs forum they could be considered trolling. Prior to the thread question, your last post was in April. Prior to that you posted in September 2008. You have a total of about 25 post in the Spurs forum. Thus there is a lack of history to judge your posting meaning. Making comments like these just inflame the situation. Just because you received positive rep does not mean that the posts had merit. The same goes for negative rep. It would not mean that the post had no merit. see my, comments above about how you were "clearly" supporting spurs If you are truly a fan of English football on BigSoccer then you will know how provincial EPL fora are. Sadly, to my disappointment, the spurs forum is no different. But your name calling does not do your position justice. Not necessarily agreed about the warning, but his responses did not do him any favors Perhaps you need to learn how to edit your posting. Up until this last sentence I was in favor of rescinding the first infraction. You should expect more on BS and not less - I do. As for your method of appeal this is a good place to do it. There is no council, there is only to TallTowerMan. You shouldn't believe everything you see on the youtubes!
"But you also made the accusation that double as socks." i have been accused of having socks, and have accused others. i didnt realise that to say this about a mod was automatic infraction points? i think your wrong on this one. "Lost, nobody has a god given right to post where ever they want or whatever they want." show me where i said this was the case? "Making comments like these just inflame the situation." i think you will find that the initial infraction was for calling redknapp a cnut, hence it was clearly the reputation of redknapp that the double felt the need to defend, and then dress this up as an accusation of trolling on tottenham hotspur. so i was correct to make my counter accusation. "Perhaps you need to learn how to edit your posting. Up until this last sentence I was in favor of rescinding the first infraction." my comments were made in responce to an injustice. if this had not been the case, surely i would not have felt the need to be a bastard. "There is no council, there is only to TallTowerMan." so the only recourse for posters is to message talltowerman?
Lost you've missed the point. You are an unknown quantity on the spurs forum. In my previous post I quoted 10 separate examples in which you called 'arry, in some form, dim, dumb, stupid, idiot, or, directly, a ********. You have made with 15 posts in the spurs forum in the last two years. Your rate at insulting either spurs, 'arry, or double is two out of every three posts. I never said it was an automatic infraction. I only said to prove your accusation. In other words, what type of evidence made you believe that double has socks? You did not directly say this, but you did infer this. Did double saying that you received the infraction specifically because you called him a ********? It would surprise me if any mod did that. Dude, quit playing the victim. It was an attempt to bring him into the situation. Here is the thread for your enjoyment. https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1152520
soccer nutter, you are defending a friend which is admrable but you are missing the facts. "I never said it was an automatic infraction. I only said to prove your accusation." yet i was infracted for it, lending futher credence to my claim that it should be rescinded. "You did not directly say this, but you did infer this." again, more of your own invention. if you cant show me where i said ' i think i can post anything i want, where i want' then you are proven to be talking baloney. changing your tune and insinuating that i implied something that could be construed to mean this is bollox, i didnt categorically state this or even imply it. show me your evidence. "Did double saying that you received the infraction specifically because you called him a ********? It would surprise me if any mod did that. " well prepare to be surprised. the post i was infracted for was fairly innocuous, other than the comparison of harry to the female genitalia. no further detail was given, other than that the infraction was that this post was infracted for 'trolling' "Dude, quit playing the victim." like i said and you conveniently ignored, i would not felt the need to be rude unless a percieved injustice had not already been metered out. if someone takes your wallet and you call them an asshole, it would be a little surprising to find out that you were being castigated later for your reponce. "Lost you've missed the point." thats probably because your not making it very well. if you want the last word, go ahead, ive already lost interest. in responce to my original question, the answer i take it is a resounding : 'no, all infractions must stand, mods word is final, regardless of how stupid, petty or wrong the mod or the infraction is. there is no recourse for appeal.' thanks for the help. may i now request that a system be set up for the betterment of bigsoccer.com whereby appeals can be made. i can see this will add to workload, but in the interests of keeping a forum which is up to to date with democracy and principles of justice post revolutionary france, possibly unchecked authority from a select few might also require the occasional check or balance, in the interests of those who do not have any control, but without whom there would be no one to police?
sorry to draw attention to myself again, but it appears i have been banned from the tottenham forum. no explanation, no dates, unable to view the forum. this is total crap.
You'll get an explanation. The forum mod cannot ban you - they have to ask. If and when it goes through, it may not be during a period when they are online.
lmfao.. that's the reason you were banned probably, because you drew attention to yourself. Unless you did something completely ass, you probably miffed the team so much, they got the go ahead to ban you. Don't even bother complaining, it's rather pointless. Usually it works like this Complainer Makes thread -> mod comes in angry -> super mod analyzes and makes statement usually against the OP -> people come in and laugh at you -> popcorn smiley -> and OP finds they've been banned. Sorry but just noticed that it's the trend with all these complaint threads.
finally got an explantion about the spuds forum ban: "You've been banned from the Tottenham Hotspur forum for 2 weeks. A commitment to not trolling the forum is needed for your reinstatement to the forum." responded with: "slight problem here as your idea of trolling differs from mine, the tos, other mods and many other posters idea of what trolling is. perhaps, in the interest of clarity, you would not mind posting your views on a thread i set up https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1523072 happy to make any pledges required, but as i said, your rules seem to differ greatly from the rest of bigscoccers. " which i think is reasonable. i think the doubles idea of a pledge includes needing the ability to read minds, which am afraid is something no one can honestly commit to, and being aware of who his favourite personalities at whl are. for example, bashing pavluchenko, as many were doing on the evening i was on their forum, is fair game, as is bashing david bentley. but if i were to castigate crouch for being a lanky spastic with no talent, or call redknapp a crooked used car dealer with a face like a fked vagina , this is not acceptable because it is picking on people that the moderator has a wet spot for.
lost, this forum is not in world rivalries. It is not at a pub or on your living room sofa chatting with some mates. Yes, you find cursing around bigsoccer non-rivalry forums, usually amongst friendly members but making an explitive-laced angry first post in a forum you don't normally post in is often going to create problems. The men and women participating at bigsoccer are sports fans and are not easily shocked by occasional foul language but that doesn't mean we want to see it over and over again. Your continual skirting of the auto-censor and making sexist/sexual insults here is not helping you. It's part of why you created a problem in the Spurs forum in the first place. It would never occur to me to go into another team's forum that I don't post in and say the things you said about the team and coach in the way you said them, I would expect a strong reaction. I've taken your complaint seriously but the chain of events starts with you and your posting. Words, the timing of words and who they are coming from and who they are said to mean something here, just like in real life. If you talk like this to everyone you meet, well.... I don't know what to say.