Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2021 8:55:33 GMT
Moderators have a responsibility to maintain acceptable standards on the forum. My post stated that it is fair enough to criticise Barton that is not the issue. If you're saying it's fair enough why raise it as part of your critique of his posts? Because it was part of a numerical analysis of his recent posts.
|
|
|
Post by Officer Barbrady on Jul 29, 2021 9:09:35 GMT
If you're saying it's fair enough why raise it as part of your critique of his posts? Because it was part of a numerical analysis of his recent posts. do one for Bolders
|
|
|
Post by oldie on Jul 29, 2021 9:28:19 GMT
Like you sir, I too am fascinated by the faux outrage expressed by some because a member posts a very strong opinion about Barton. As you say, that he is a moderator is not relevant. Moderators have a responsibility to maintain acceptable standards on the forum. My post stated that it is fair enough to criticise Barton that is not the issue. I understand what you are trying to say, but to establish a "standard" is a minefield. The moderators can and should establish rules, such as WUM like behaviour, a rule that GGMI fell foul of I believe, but beyond that surely the boundaries are defamation and perhaps slander? Telling somebody to eff off is more adolescent than an abuse of a presumed standard. My opinion is that aggressive language hides an inability to argue a point coherently. By aggressive I do not mean strongly worded rebuttals, but single sentence swearing. Just my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jul 29, 2021 9:33:47 GMT
How can a poster on an internet forum be "aggressive" towards a football club? How can they be aggressive towards Barton who isn't a member of the forum? I genuinely don't understand what you mean by that. It really seems like you're trying to make something out of nothing because of a personal dislike. You are more than capable of answering your own questions so I'm not taking the bait. I have no personal dislike of Roverdrive. That's a bit of an odd response. If I was capable of answering the question I would not have asked it. You've made specific allegations about someone - you should be able to defend those allegations, it's not for me to assist you in doing that. I'm still not sure what possible act of aggression there can be on an internet forum towards a football club.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jul 29, 2021 9:34:53 GMT
If you're saying it's fair enough why raise it as part of your critique of his posts? Because it was part of a numerical analysis of his recent posts. If you have no problem with him why are you doing a numerical analysis of his recent posts?
|
|
|
Post by richhertford on Jul 29, 2021 10:26:44 GMT
I think the forum needs a reset. 😀 There is no need to offend people on this forum. I’ve always felt that the overwhelming majority are helpful and considerate posters. It’s time for all the good posters to rise up and outplay the inconsiderate posters. These posters create all sorts of mental health issues for some fans with their inconsiderate posts. Enough is enough..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2021 12:37:21 GMT
Moderators have a responsibility to maintain acceptable standards on the forum. My post stated that it is fair enough to criticise Barton that is not the issue. I understand what you are trying to say, but to establish a "standard" is a minefield. The moderators can and should establish rules, such as WUM like behaviour, a rule that GGMI fell foul of I believe, but beyond that surely the boundaries are defamation and perhaps slander? Telling somebody to eff off is more adolescent than an abuse of a presumed standard. My opinion is that aggressive language hides an inability to argue a point coherently. By aggressive I do not mean strongly worded rebuttals, but single sentence swearing. Just my opinion. An established standard on general behaviour is one thing and I get that is difficult to achieve but what we’ve seen over the course of the past week is verging on defamation and libel. This is where I thought the mods were supposed to act to keep matters above board and also set a better example. I’ve seen one regular poster get pulled up by a mod when overstepping the mark (in a legal regard) but when a fellow mod goes even further nothing gets said. Is it any wonder that such inconsistency leads to things getting out of hand and moderators getting questioned?
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jul 29, 2021 12:53:00 GMT
I understand what you are trying to say, but to establish a "standard" is a minefield. The moderators can and should establish rules, such as WUM like behaviour, a rule that GGMI fell foul of I believe, but beyond that surely the boundaries are defamation and perhaps slander? Telling somebody to eff off is more adolescent than an abuse of a presumed standard. My opinion is that aggressive language hides an inability to argue a point coherently. By aggressive I do not mean strongly worded rebuttals, but single sentence swearing. Just my opinion. An established standard on general behaviour is one thing and I get that is difficult to achieve but what we’ve seen over the course of the past week is verging on defamation and libel. This is where I thought the mods were supposed to act to keep matters above board and also set a better example. I’ve seen one regular poster get pulled up by a mod when overstepping the mark (in a legal regard) but when a fellow mod goes even further nothing gets said. Is it any wonder that such inconsistency leads to things getting out of hand and moderators getting questioned? The question of whether something is defamatory or not is a very niche legal question - defences include fair comment and giving opinion - the mods aren't lawyers (or at least aren't acting as such). This whole thing trying to pin a single mod for the choice of an individual to delete their account because they wanted to give succour to a WUM bully is silly.
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Jul 29, 2021 13:03:51 GMT
I think the forum needs a reset. 😀 There is no need to offend people on this forum. I’ve always felt that the overwhelming majority are helpful and considerate posters. It’s time for all the good posters to rise up and outplay the inconsiderate posters. These posters create all sorts of mental health issues for some fans with their inconsiderate posts. Enough is enough.. No need for a reset. You argue, we argue, you don't like it, go away. It's that simple.
|
|
|
Post by cockergas on Jul 29, 2021 13:07:29 GMT
An established standard on general behaviour is one thing and I get that is difficult to achieve but what we’ve seen over the course of the past week is verging on defamation and libel. This is where I thought the mods were supposed to act to keep matters above board and also set a better example. I’ve seen one regular poster get pulled up by a mod when overstepping the mark (in a legal regard) but when a fellow mod goes even further nothing gets said. Is it any wonder that such inconsistency leads to things getting out of hand and moderators getting questioned? The question of whether something is defamatory or not is a very niche legal question - defences include fair comment and giving opinion - the mods aren't lawyers (or at least aren't acting as such). This whole thing trying to pin a single mod for the choice of an individual to delete their account because they wanted to give succour to a WUM bully is silly. so do you think post like this are constructive and help matters? Do they promote healthy debate? ”Just want to know what filth we have on here that would continue to support a convicted wife beater. Pretty reasonable request I would think - if you've got the nerve to support someone through that, imo you should have the balls to come out and admit it. No doubt you'll continue to support your messiah”
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jul 29, 2021 13:39:39 GMT
The question of whether something is defamatory or not is a very niche legal question - defences include fair comment and giving opinion - the mods aren't lawyers (or at least aren't acting as such). This whole thing trying to pin a single mod for the choice of an individual to delete their account because they wanted to give succour to a WUM bully is silly. so do you think post like this are constructive and help matters? Do they promote healthy debate? ”Just want to know what filth we have on here that would continue to support a convicted wife beater. Pretty reasonable request I would think - if you've got the nerve to support someone through that, imo you should have the balls to come out and admit it. No doubt you'll continue to support your messiah” Well the issue of domestic violence is clearly a very emotive one. You don't know what the individual's life experience is of that. I struggle to see how having a strong and vociferous opposition to such a thing could be unhealthy. Quite the opposite in fact. If a person has an equally strong support of domestic violence that they want to rebut what Roverdrive has said I'd be interested (though disgusted) to hear it.
|
|
|
Post by cockergas on Jul 29, 2021 13:55:46 GMT
so do you think post like this are constructive and help matters? Do they promote healthy debate? ”Just want to know what filth we have on here that would continue to support a convicted wife beater. Pretty reasonable request I would think - if you've got the nerve to support someone through that, imo you should have the balls to come out and admit it. No doubt you'll continue to support your messiah” Well the issue of domestic violence is clearly a very emotive one. You don't know what the individual's life experience is of that. I struggle to see how having a strong and vociferous opposition to such a thing could be unhealthy. Quite the opposite in fact. If a person has an equally strong support of domestic violence that they want to rebut what Roverdrive has said I'd be interested (though disgusted) to hear it. the whole purpose of the thread is about members of the forum leaving, my point is that it’s hardly surprising when they are referred to as “filth”. No one is condoning or supporting domestic violence and if they did I would expect them to have an immediate ban, but the fact is Barton is not a convicted wife beater, not yet anyway. Roverdrive should be able to get his view across without insulting everyone who has a slightly different view to him.
|
|
|
Post by gasandelectricity on Jul 29, 2021 14:03:41 GMT
I understand what you are trying to say, but to establish a "standard" is a minefield. The moderators can and should establish rules, such as WUM like behaviour, a rule that GGMI fell foul of I believe, but beyond that surely the boundaries are defamation and perhaps slander? Telling somebody to eff off is more adolescent than an abuse of a presumed standard. My opinion is that aggressive language hides an inability to argue a point coherently. By aggressive I do not mean strongly worded rebuttals, but single sentence swearing. Just my opinion. An established standard on general behaviour is one thing and I get that is difficult to achieve but what we’ve seen over the course of the past week is verging on defamation and libel. This is where I thought the mods were supposed to act to keep matters above board and also set a better example. I’ve seen one regular poster get pulled up by a mod when overstepping the mark (in a legal regard) but when a fellow mod goes even further nothing gets said. Is it any wonder that such inconsistency leads to things getting out of hand and moderators getting questioned? Said poster wasn’t getting pulled up. I was rebutting their argument and trying to help them up by offering up a caution against a statement of libel for their own, and the wider benefit. I didn’t see RDs comment, probably because at the point it was being posted there were pages passing through every ten minutes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2021 14:07:45 GMT
An established standard on general behaviour is one thing and I get that is difficult to achieve but what we’ve seen over the course of the past week is verging on defamation and libel. This is where I thought the mods were supposed to act to keep matters above board and also set a better example. I’ve seen one regular poster get pulled up by a mod when overstepping the mark (in a legal regard) but when a fellow mod goes even further nothing gets said. Is it any wonder that such inconsistency leads to things getting out of hand and moderators getting questioned? The question of whether something is defamatory or not is a very niche legal question - defences include fair comment and giving opinion - the mods aren't lawyers (or at least aren't acting as such). This whole thing trying to pin a single mod for the choice of an individual to delete their account because they wanted to give succour to a WUM bully is silly. My concern with the mod in question were his behaviour, use of language but most importantly ability to push the boundaries of law without any question being raised. I don’t expect the mods to be lawyers but how do they manage to pull one poster up for pushing legal boundaries but not a word to one of their own. Are they lawyers one minute and not the next? Surely the least we can expect is consistency. For the record I don’t personally know those who have left nor the reasons why and what role any other party (mod or member) played in their decision.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2021 14:10:58 GMT
An established standard on general behaviour is one thing and I get that is difficult to achieve but what we’ve seen over the course of the past week is verging on defamation and libel. This is where I thought the mods were supposed to act to keep matters above board and also set a better example. I’ve seen one regular poster get pulled up by a mod when overstepping the mark (in a legal regard) but when a fellow mod goes even further nothing gets said. Is it any wonder that such inconsistency leads to things getting out of hand and moderators getting questioned? Said poster wasn’t getting pulled up. I was rebutting their argument and trying to help them up by offering up a caution against a statement of libel for their own, and the wider benefit. I didn’t see RDs comment, probably because at the point it was being posted there were pages passing through every ten minutes. I’m happy to take your word for that. Seems most of the mods were on that thread a lot and I’m surprised nobody saw RD’s dodgy comment. You can’t be surprised there are concerns over consistency when things like this happen.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jul 29, 2021 14:23:35 GMT
Well the issue of domestic violence is clearly a very emotive one. You don't know what the individual's life experience is of that. I struggle to see how having a strong and vociferous opposition to such a thing could be unhealthy. Quite the opposite in fact. If a person has an equally strong support of domestic violence that they want to rebut what Roverdrive has said I'd be interested (though disgusted) to hear it. the whole purpose of the thread is about members of the forum leaving, my point is that it’s hardly surprising when they are referred to as “filth”. No one is condoning or supporting domestic violence and if they did I would expect them to have an immediate ban, but the fact is Barton is not a convicted wife beater, not yet anyway. Roverdrive should be able to get his view across without insulting everyone who has a slightly different view to him. Well the quote you posted above clearly refers to the circumstances in which he is convicted. I don't think you can read that any other way. It clearly doesn't say he is convicted so the claim that this is defamatory is still silly and in my opinion motivated for personal reasons and frankly, not that far off bullying. I think it's fine to call someone who would offer support to a convicted wife beater filth. I'm genuinely struggling to see how you can have any opposition to that statement. If you have one, state your case.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jul 29, 2021 14:28:41 GMT
The question of whether something is defamatory or not is a very niche legal question - defences include fair comment and giving opinion - the mods aren't lawyers (or at least aren't acting as such). This whole thing trying to pin a single mod for the choice of an individual to delete their account because they wanted to give succour to a WUM bully is silly. My concern with the mod in question were his behaviour, use of language but most importantly ability to push the boundaries of law without any question being raised. I don’t expect the mods to be lawyers but how do they manage to pull one poster up for pushing legal boundaries but not a word to one of their own. Are they lawyers one minute and not the next? Surely the least we can expect is consistency. For the record I don’t personally know those who have left nor the reasons why and what role any other party (mod or member) played in their decision. This whole "push the boundaries of law" and defamation thing is utter nonsense. Everything said is easily defensible on the grounds of opinion and fair comment. In relation to what mods do and don't do I think the answer to your question is that they are human beings and therefore fallible.
|
|
|
Post by cockergas on Jul 29, 2021 14:33:11 GMT
the whole purpose of the thread is about members of the forum leaving, my point is that it’s hardly surprising when they are referred to as “filth”. No one is condoning or supporting domestic violence and if they did I would expect them to have an immediate ban, but the fact is Barton is not a convicted wife beater, not yet anyway. Roverdrive should be able to get his view across without insulting everyone who has a slightly different view to him. Well the quote you posted above clearly refers to the circumstances in which he is convicted. I don't think you can read that any other way. It clearly doesn't say he is convicted so the claim that this is defamatory is still silly and in my opinion motivated for personal reasons and frankly, not that far off bullying. I think it's fine to call someone who would offer support to a convicted wife beater filth. I'm genuinely struggling to see how you can have any opposition to that statement. If you have one, state your case. maybe the definition of ‘convicted’ might help you. “having been declared guilty of a criminal offence by the verdict of a jury or the decision of a judge” I don’t think he has been found guilty, therefor he is not a convicted wife beater.
|
|
|
Post by BelieveItWhenIAmSatInIt on Jul 29, 2021 14:33:33 GMT
Can I just check, are we not allowed to call Joey Barton a Special lady garden on this forum then? Seems to be a lot of people upset that some don't like him?
I am just checking as I personally think he is a thuggish scum bag who should never have been allowed anywhere near our club and I honestly do not see myself being particularly arsed about the club until he is gone.. So.. Wanted to be clear of the rules before I made my feelings clear.
Until I know for sure I will just keep my feelings on Joey Barton neutral.
Thanks in advanced Mods.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2021 14:39:25 GMT
My concern with the mod in question were his behaviour, use of language but most importantly ability to push the boundaries of law without any question being raised. I don’t expect the mods to be lawyers but how do they manage to pull one poster up for pushing legal boundaries but not a word to one of their own. Are they lawyers one minute and not the next? Surely the least we can expect is consistency. For the record I don’t personally know those who have left nor the reasons why and what role any other party (mod or member) played in their decision. This whole "push the boundaries of law" and defamation thing is utter nonsense. Everything said is easily defensible on the grounds of opinion and fair comment. In relation to what mods do and don't do I think the answer to your question is that they are human beings and therefore fallible. The mods presumably don’t feel it is nonsense and one chose to raise this with a poster on this very subject. Of course we are all fallible and mistakes happen, however the mods still need to act with care and consistency to gain the trust and respect of forum members.
|
|